Democracy Arsenal

« Skelton Gets the Broader Context | Main | Looking for the positive on the Iraqi army... at least they have people »

April 09, 2008

Iraq is Hard
Posted by Ilan Goldenberg

Phil Carter has a great wrap up of yesterday's testimony.

So what is our strategy in Iraq? And for that matter, what is "victory?" How does a "victory" in Iraq relate to America's larger national security interests? Petraeus and Crocker effectively punted on these grand questions, as they did last September, offering only that we needed to persevere and succeed to avoid vague Somalia-like predictions of what might happen if we don't.

That's not a good enough answer for me. I don't think that Petraeus and Crocker justified our enormous investment of blood and treasure with their testimony yesterday.

But I also think that responsibility is above their paygrade. The real answers to these grand questions must come from the White House and Pentagon -- and they must be argued convincingly enough to earn the support of the American people and their elected representatives.

Yesterday's testimony highlighted our strategic drift, and how Sisyphean our efforts in Iraq have been for the past five years. We owe something more to our men and women serving in Iraq, and to the Iraqis. 

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/317463/27937176

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Iraq is Hard:

Comments

Post a comment