The True Reality-Based Community In Iraq

By Pejman Yousefzadeh Posted in | Comments (4) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

It is personified by General David Petraeus:

The head of US forces in Iraq, General David Petraeus, has told the BBC that fighting the insurgency is a "long term endeavour" which could take decades.

Speaking to the BBC's John Simpson in Baquba, Gen Petraeus said there was evidence that the recent troops surge was producing gains on the ground.

But he warned that US forces were engaged in a "tough fight" which will get "harder before it gets easier".

His comments come as US calls for a rapid troop withdrawal gather strength.

Gen Petraeus was keen to emphasise that the ongoing unrest in Iraq is not something he expects to be resolved overnight.

"Northern Ireland, I think, taught you that very well. My counterparts in your [British] forces really understand this kind of operation... It took a long time, decades," he said.

"I don't know whether this will be decades, but the average counter insurgency is somewhere around a nine or a 10 year endeavour."

Alas, he will not be given even remotely enough time to complete this mission. And he will unjustifiably be set up as one of the fall guys when the plug is pulled on his efforts.


« Republican Moderates May Walk Away From Veto ThreatComments (17) | The Possible Outlines Of A Post-Surge IraqComments (0) »
The True Reality-Based Community In Iraq 4 Comments (0 topical, 4 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »

This is the second time recently that General David Petraeus has talked about it taking 10 years or more to see success in Iraq.

He is a smart man - he must know the way the political winds are blowing in Washington. Is there a subtext to what he is saying? I wonder.

Looks like he's saying the mission, as-is, will fail. Either he needs a bigger check to cash, or we need to decide we're willing to live without a gold-standard product.

I think the chances of him getting significantly more time and resources are slim-to-none. Elections have consequences, and the Pentagon is talking about March as a practical limit to the current surge.

Depressing. But let's use the time remaining, and do what we can for the long-term.

The question now is not if we are going to leave Iraq, but when. The politicians are running for the doors and in time the administration won't have enough support to veto much of anything regarding the war. All that remains is the consequences, and no one thinks they will be pretty.

said that the struggle will take 15 years.

I think the American public would be satisfied to see a significant reduction in the number of troops, which means a significant reduction in the number of al Quaeda and radical Shiites. If we can remove enough of the enemy, establish some semblance of order, and bring home a large number of troops, it will be percieved as victory, and allow us to keep a military presence in Iraq.

But as long as Pelosi is giving Syria permission to invade Lebanon, and the Dems are giving AQ hope that they will be able to unilaterally surrender, and as long as we have the ISG identifying Israel as the primary problem in the Mideast, it seems unlikely.

 
Redstate Network Login:
(lost password?)


©2008 Eagle Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. Legal, Copyright, and Terms of Service