Decius wrote:
Well, the Pentagon, which employs experts on military tactics, says that they can't tell whether or not this is working until it reaches a certain stage. "The surge" is not merely a re-enforcement and it doesn't unfold in a linear way. Its more complicated then that.

I'll agree on the military level but this doesn't address the political issues which are the point of the surge.

Its not as if George Bush is personally reporting in September. The military is. The reason its clear at that point and not clear now is that at that point they have completed enough of the tasks in their project plan to be able to assess the effectiveness of their new tactics. The assessment will be quantitative and you'll have access to data. I seriously think that you expect them to lie because you don't like George Bush and not because you've looked into what they are doing and what they are reporting on, and I think you should.

Tom, you missed the boat on this. The report coming out in September, as has been widely reported, is being issued not by the Petreaus and the military people, it's coming from the White House. Their credibility at this point is basically zero. Even if that were not the case, let's say the military aspects of the surge are working, the Iraqis are showing no sign of putting together the kind of honest cooperative government needed to stem the civil war. Nor does it appear they have any intention to do so, in some respects the opposite appears to be the case.

It's not an extremist position to
a) believe the war was executed incorrectly from day 1
b) believe that the surge is an ineffective gesture; pabulum meant to subdue the American public and congress
c) distrust the administrations claims about this war.

No, its not. A is clearly correct by anyone's estimation, and A clearly implies C. The problem is B.

There may be a problem with B. My personal impression is that this was an attempt to keep the war going long enough to blame the pullout on whoever comes after W, just like W earlier in this week blamed the loss of Vietnam on the anti-war movement. That's not just wrong, it's insulting. And so long as C is more than valid, not just about the war, but as we've seen with trainwreck scandal after trainwreck scandal, it is valid on every issue the White House raises, B is not only not an extremist position, it is a perfectly reasonable assumption when dealing with a bunch who has lied and dissembled at every turn.

If the surge report is positive and the US pulls out anyway it will show, at MOST, that the American people and congress no longer have faith in this administration or even, possibly, government in general, and completely disbelieve it.

Perhaps. They may be the boy who cried wolf at this point, but that story is a tragic one.

Tragedy implies something that is unfortunate for all involved. It is a tragedy for the nation that the government has shown themselves to be so untrustworthy that we have reached this point, but there is nothing tragic in the actions of the administration. They have been nothing more than a pack of crooks and liars, baying at the doors of a nation that looks to its leaders for honesty, and betraying it for their own selfish purposes.

And oh yes,

These people must reach certain milestones in order for you to stay. Perhaps they haven't reached those milestones because they don't want you to stay.

I hope you meant us rather than you because they don't give a damn if it's you, me, W, or Jane fucking Fonda over there.

RE: Obsidian Wings: Bush's Speech