So the odious Richard Perle thinks it's time to claim victory and place the wreath on the head of the unlamented W, and by implication, himself:
So, President Obama, who pledged a quick withdrawal from Iraq when many thought we were facing defeat there and crucial Democratic primary voters were demanding withdrawal yesterday, has decided on a slower, measured drawdown that will leave up to 50,000 American troops behind. They could remain until the end of 2011, the date on which the Bush administration agreed with the Iraqi government to complete the departure of American forces.
[From Richard Perle: The president should acknowledge the success of the surge and Iraq's progress to democracy | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk]
Of course this sidesteps a whole bunch of inconvenient stuff, like, uhhh, up to a million dead and several million sitting in refugee camps, essentially homeless
Marc Ambinder puts it well over at The Atlantic:
President Obama very appropriately and correctly thanked U.S. Marnines for precipitating the turnabout in Iraq. But if there is a chance of success in Iraq now as defined by Barack Obama, shouldn't there be some mention of the change in strategy, and the former Commander in Chief, the guy who hung in there? I think the American people will be more persuaded by the arguments for the counter; we don't know if Iraq is a success yet; we won't know for years; the problems solved by American troops were created by American politicians; the troops did their duty and did what was asked of them, but the asking was illegitimate and wrong.
Richard, I hear voices calling....
No comments:
Post a Comment