here's the iraq analysis from the crispy command center. we are getting out: the political realitty has obviously dawned on the republican party. the language of withdrawal out of dc (and london, btw) comes with confidence, an optimistic assessment of the "readiness of iraqi military and police units," etc. but now this talk is in absolutely bizarre juxtaposition to a situation that is in freefall disintegration. it took the admin about 10 minutes to declare victory over civil war after the golden mosque. al-sadr urged restraint. then the bodies started piling up.
what will happen is this: we will "draw down," ceding more and more of the country to a government not distinct from the shia paramilitary units. the government we leave iraq with is going to be a monster of reprisal; its crimes against humanity are already obvious (even the us gove isn't happy) . and we leave a strengthened iran, obviously, now by far the most strategically aggressive and formidable country in the region.
the chickenheartedness of the admin at this point is astounding considering the perversity of their sticktoitiveness up to this point. but no one is at last immune from political realities. the 2008 republican nomination fight is going to have a lot to do with articulating a policy.
the dems on this are truly, truly useless, as always. i saw harry reid "replying" to bush's recent iraq speeches. someone asked him: do the democrats have a clear program for iraq? reid replies, looking soulfully into the camera, that they would train the iraqis and let them run their own country. in other words, he recapitulates the speech he's attacking. there has never been a moment when the dem mainstream leadership from kerry to hill has disagreed even one iota with the republican policy.
so: what is trhe proper response? well, maybe you need to start thinking about the real alternatives: abandonment. or here's one way to interpret what we owe these people at this point: a partition, in which the u.s. force is going to be as much as anything preventing destruction of the sunnis. obviously, there ought to be a kurdistan, though the turks don't want to hear it.
this of course takes even more commitment over even a longer haul. but do these people even for a moment frankly confronting the situation or broaching the real alternatives?