In a competitive democracy, it is difficult to rescue a war built on distortions and illusions, because, to protect falsehoods proffered to voters in the past, a President and his advisers may find it tempting to manufacture more of them. It does not require a cynic to see that even an implausible escalation plan has the virtue of putting domestic political opponents back on their heels. This was the advice given by McGeorge Bundy to Lyndon Johnson in a memo dated February 7, 1965, concerning an escalation plan for Vietnam that Bundy thought might have as little as a twenty-five-per-cent chance of success:

Even if it fails, the policy will be worth it. At a minimum it will damp down the charge that we did not do all that we could have done, and this charge will be important in many countries, including our own.

The Bush Administration is now reworking this sad axiom, and, once again, American soldiers will be asked to give their lives for its assumptions. Under the Constitution, only Congress can prevent this from occurring, but its members have exhibited little evidence in the past that they possess the skill or the will to do so.

This seems like as good a time as any to drop in my belated comments on the Surge address:

To give every Iraqi citizen a stake in the country's economy, Iraq will pass legislation to share oil revenues among all Iraqis.

That way, no one needs to get a real job, which is rather quite convenient, because there really aren't any.

To show that it is committed to delivering a better life, the Iraqi government will spend $10 billion of its own money on reconstruction and infrastructure projects that will create new jobs.

The phrase "of its own money" sounds like the accumulated weekly allowance of a child.

This would bring al Qaeda closer to its goals of taking down Iraq's democracy, building a radical Islamic empire, and launching new attacks on the United States at home and abroad.

Al Qaeda doesn't want to base its empire on a Shia population.

America's men and women in uniform took away al Qaeda's safe haven in Afghanistan -- and we will not allow them to re-establish it in Iraq.

Fortunately for al Qaeda, Pakistan is working out just fine right now.

Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity and stabilizing the region in the face of extremist challenges. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria.

This is not quite the dialogue the Study Group had in mind.

We will ... deploy Patriot air defense systems to reassure our friends and allies.

How is this relevant to the fight against sectarian violence in Baghdad? Oh, right; this is where the cats and dogs come in.

Countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and the Gulf States need to understand that an American defeat in Iraq would create a new sanctuary for extremists and a strategic threat to their survival.

Where is Pakistan?

It is the decisive ideological struggle of our time. On one side are those who believe in freedom and moderation. On the other side are extremists who kill the innocent, and have declared their intention to destroy our way of life.

Recall the Doonesbury cartoon ... false dichotomies.

The handy thing about this characterization is that it's fully reversible.

... millions of ordinary people are sick of the violence ...

This has a certain John Edwards sound to it.

Let me be clear: The terrorists and insurgents in Iraq are without conscience ...

Again, total lack of understanding of the adversary.

Comment: The Planner | Steve Coll | The New Yorker