Saturday, October 09, 2004
Sizing Up Iraq
Excellent analysis by Victor Davis Hanson on what's going on in Iraq.
It starts off with:
From the various insurgencies of the Peloponnesian War to the British victory over Communist guerrillas in Malaya, there remain constants across 2,500 years of time and space that presage victory or defeat. Drawing wisdom from that past, there are at least four critical issues that must always be addressed if we are to create a stable Iraq under the auspices of a broad-based consensual government. So far the occupation has been plagued by mistakes, false assumptions, and incompetence — and yet we find ourselves still with a good chance of success.
His critical issues are:
First, is the United States winning its engagements on the ground?
Second, are the terrorists — through their suicide bombing, car explosions, hostage-takings, and beheadings — winning widespread Iraqi support?
Third, does fighting the terrorists lead to a political resolution that offers manifest advantages to the majority of Iraqis, and is it recognized as such
Fourth, is there a mechanism for the United States to ease out of Iraq?
His discussions on these points are interesting and ought to be read.
And he makes this point which we all ought to consider:
THE KERRY NON-ALTERNATIVE
Meanwhile, Senator Kerry offers neither a plan to stay nor one to leave Iraq, only something "secret." He thinks a country that defeated Japan, Italy, and Germany at the same time as a warm-up to keeping at bay a nuclear Soviet Union and China must fail if she takes on Afghanistan and Iraq at once. His trial balloons so far — beg the Germans and French to come in and give the Iranians clean uranium — have met with polite chuckles. We already know the effect that such warmed-over Carterism will have in Iraq: failure with the added wage of humiliation.
It starts off with:
From the various insurgencies of the Peloponnesian War to the British victory over Communist guerrillas in Malaya, there remain constants across 2,500 years of time and space that presage victory or defeat. Drawing wisdom from that past, there are at least four critical issues that must always be addressed if we are to create a stable Iraq under the auspices of a broad-based consensual government. So far the occupation has been plagued by mistakes, false assumptions, and incompetence — and yet we find ourselves still with a good chance of success.
His critical issues are:
First, is the United States winning its engagements on the ground?
Second, are the terrorists — through their suicide bombing, car explosions, hostage-takings, and beheadings — winning widespread Iraqi support?
Third, does fighting the terrorists lead to a political resolution that offers manifest advantages to the majority of Iraqis, and is it recognized as such
Fourth, is there a mechanism for the United States to ease out of Iraq?
His discussions on these points are interesting and ought to be read.
And he makes this point which we all ought to consider:
THE KERRY NON-ALTERNATIVE
Meanwhile, Senator Kerry offers neither a plan to stay nor one to leave Iraq, only something "secret." He thinks a country that defeated Japan, Italy, and Germany at the same time as a warm-up to keeping at bay a nuclear Soviet Union and China must fail if she takes on Afghanistan and Iraq at once. His trial balloons so far — beg the Germans and French to come in and give the Iranians clean uranium — have met with polite chuckles. We already know the effect that such warmed-over Carterism will have in Iraq: failure with the added wage of humiliation.
# posted by Knitting a Conundrum @ 8:15 AM 
