Finally, the MSM is publishing something positive in Iraq. It must of killed multiple editors at the New York Times to run the story. But the article is excellent and the last four points of Former Secretary of Defense West is an awesome summation. Which I have included below. However if you have the time read the entire article to understand the good news on the ground in Iraq please go to NYT to do that. Also check out the excellent write up at BlackFive.In summary, I would make four points.
First, General Petraeus is our wartime leader. He has a smart, experienced staff. He will provide to you a fulsome, balanced assessment in September - far superior to anything you will hear in the interim.
Second, how you, our elected leaders, depict our withdrawal will have profound consequences. To a very large extent, you will shape the narrative, determining how our great nation is perceived and how friends and enemies respond to us.
Third, if the rationale for withdrawal is because Iraq seems hopeless, then leaving behind a residual force is fraught with peril. You cannot quit, and expect to manage what happens after you quit. Iraq, if it perceives it is being abandoned, could fly apart quickly.
Fourth, the rationale for withdrawal drives everything that comes thereafter. Why are we withdrawing? Is it because we as a nation have given up, concluding that full-scale civil war is inevitable; or has our military succeeded, allowing Iraqi forces to maintain stability?
I do not see a compromise "middle ground" between those two rationales.
Thank you.
