The Hill’s Pundits Blog

August 22, 2007

Many Democrats Wrong on Iraq, Again

Brent Budowsky

Here is my answer to Kenneth Pollack, Michael O’Hanlon and the latest tragic evasion and spin currently circulating in high Democratic circles: 

This morning’s story in The Washington Post (“Democrats Refocus Message on Iraq After Military Gains”) is accurate and conforms to what I am hearing privately. Many Democrats are again missing the first principle of the matter and treating Iraq in political and tactical terms.

The latest view from Democrats is to adopt their politics and tactics around the proposition that the Iraq escalation is working but the Iraq leaders are not…

Let’s get this straight: Any success in Anbar is not because of the surge, but because of the deals made with Sunni insurgents who shortly before the deals were killing Americans, and who are now receiving American aid. This would have happened with or without the surge…

In purely military terms, under the escalation there have been short-term gains in some areas, short-term setbacks in other areas, and a shifting of al Qaeda attacks from some areas to other areas.

In purely political terms, the escalation has had the exact opposite of its marketed intent: Iraqi reconciliation has moved backwards, as parties view our simultaneous aid to all warring factions as reason to avoid, not achieve, reconciliation…

[T]hey all take our money (and in fact our weapons) as they position to kill each other when we leave, and, in the meantime, take our aid and wait us out…

Centuries of history prove the tendency, very deep in Iraqi society, not only to break apart, but to fight wars within itself, sectarian faction against sectarian faction…

This was known yesterday; it is known today; it will be known tomorrow. The great issue is how many Americans must die before our policy matches the history, culture, politics and realities of the country we invaded so casually and are trapped in so catastrophically…

There is a better way — a way that’s not easy, but possible, with a greater chance of true success…

Moving to a course of deescalation, now, and rejecting a course of escalation, into 2008, is far wiser and far better for our security, our troops and our true battle against terrorism than further continuing this catastrophic policy of presidential intransigence and Democratic submission hidden by the latest generation of political spin.

Budowsky serves on the Advisory Council of the Intelligence Summit and is a contributing editor to Fighting Dems News Service. He handled intelligence issues for Sen. Lloyd Bentsen when the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was originally passed, and was legislative director to Bill Alexander, then the chief deputy whip of the House. He can be read on The Hill’s Pundits Blog and reached at brentbbi@webtv.net.

[Click the title, above, to read more and to post a comment that may be read by your congressman and senators!—Caro]