Sidney Blumenthal, Salon:
Deep within the bowels of the Pentagon, policy planners are conducting secret meetings to discuss what to do in the worst-case scenario in Iraq about a year from today if and when President Bush's escalation of more than 20,000 troops fails, a participant in those discussions told me. None of those who are taking part in these exercises, shielded from the public view and the immediate scrutiny of the White House, believes that the so-called surge will succeed. On the contrary, everyone thinks it will not only fail to achieve its aims but also accelerate instability by providing a glaring example of U.S. incapacity and incompetence.
This isn't the first time we've tried increasing troop levels. We've done it twice before and both times -- obviously -- it's failed. But, like they say, if at first you don't succeed, try again, fail better. Or, in this case, more spectacularly with even higher body counts.
Bush makes a big deal about 'listening to military commanders.' Actually, let me amend that statement -- Bush used to make a big deal about 'listening to military commanders.' The very highest ranking military officials -- the Joint Chiefs -- opposed Bush's plan, but he didn't listen to them.
Washington Post, Dec. 19 '06:
...[T]he Joint Chiefs think the White House, after a month of talks, still does not have a defined mission and is latching on to the surge idea in part because of limited alternatives, despite warnings about the potential disadvantages for the military, said the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the White House review is not public.
So, the plan is not only poorly thought out, but it's so bad that it has the Pentagon preparing for defeat...
[CLICK TO READ FULL POST]
Tags: news | politics | war | Iraq | Bush | Military | Pentagon | congress | democrat | disaster | troop surge
