'Emotional and political make-up call'
Mickey Kaus made an observation the other day
that I can't shake from my mind, to wit: "(P)olitics seems to often dictate surge-bashing as a sort of emotional and political make-up call for failure to oppose the decision to go to war in the first place." ... Seems so true: the more vehement a pro-war stance, the more vehement the opposition to a surge, though I still can't figure out Mickey's own stance on the war. ... I'm highly skeptical of the current surge. In fact, I'm not convinced it's really designed to accomplish anything on the ground. But at least they're putting the right people in place and finally talking and behaving as if Iraq isn't a 'flypaper'
trap. Remember that awful 2003 rationalization for a bad predicament, policies and strategy? My main concern about a 'surge' was that it would be used by this incompetent administration to implement yet more bad policies in support of a bad strategy. That doesn't seem to be the case now. Not that I think it will work at this point. Bottom line: I can't get worked up either way about the surge. ... Recall Armchair Gen. Savin Hill's 2005 lament
: 'Did NO ONE in the Pentagon watch Lawrence of Arabia?'