RW Editorial: Any surge must be "large and lasting."

From Bill Kristol's rag, the Daily Standard. Sounds like the administration is sending its media foot patrol out to prepare the American public for a massive, long-term escalation of the war.

The Right Type of "Surge"
Any troop increase must be large and lasting.

by Jack Keane & Frederick W. Kagan
12/27/2006 2:00:00 PM


<snip>

We need to cut through the confusion. Bringing security to Baghdad--the essential precondition for political compromise, national reconciliation and economic development--is possible only with a surge of at least 30,000 combat troops lasting 18 months or so. Any other option is likely to fail.

The key to the success is to change the military mission--instead of preparing for transition to Iraqi control, that mission should be to bring security to the Iraqi population. Surges aimed at accelerating the training of Iraqi forces will fail, because rising sectarian violence will destroy Iraq before the new forces can bring it under control.

<snip>

Of all the "surge" options out there, short ones are the most dangerous. Increasing troop levels in Baghdad for three or six months would virtually ensure defeat. It takes that long for newly arrived soldiers to begin to understand the areas where they operate. Short surges would redeploy them just
as they began to be effective.

In addition, a short surge would play into the enemy's hands. Both Sunni insurgents and Shiite militias expect the U.S. presence to fade away over the course of 2007, and they expect any surge to be brief. They will naturally go to ground in the face of a short surge and wait until we have left. They will then attack the civilian population and whatever Iraqi security forces remain, knowing them to be easier targets than U.S. soldiers and Marines. They will work hard to raise the level of sectarian violence in order to prove that our efforts have failed.

<snip>

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/124mvwef.asp

i voted for an ebb.

Maxsolomon: Then how'd you get to be the Decider?

King George: The Lady of the Court, her arm clad in the purest shimmering ebon, held up a recount in the bosom of the swamp, signifying by divine providence that I, George, was to carry the election. THAT is why I am the Decider.

Shipwack: Listen, strange women lyin' in courts distributin' votes is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical judicial decision.

Oh, and as our men and women are fighting for their lives in Iraq, fellow right wingers can, from June 16 to June 23, 2007, enjoying a relaxing Alaska cruise with some of the right wing pundits who helped to send America to war in Iraq. They will travel in resplendent luxury "with like-minded conservatives."

There's an ad for the Alaska cruise running right next to this editorial, believe it or not.

Grotesque-- and they don't even see it.

"Long and lasting." That is what is indeed coming from Bush, of course. Impeach the bastard if he tries it.

they wouldn't have to obsess on "large and lasting surges" and big explosions and death and destruction. They are sexually repressed knuckleheads who live vicariously the lives of those real men in uniform in harms way. Meanwhile our kids continue to die while "conservatives" masturbate and dream of more carnage.

--George Carlin, commenting on the reticense to withdraw from Vietnam

They have never been right about anything, in fact in every case they have been worse than wrong. These people need to be exposed as the frauds that they are. January can't come fast enough.

Actually, this editorial sets forth pretty well why there should be no surge AT ALL:

Increasing troop levels in Baghdad for three or six months would virtually ensure defeat. It takes that long for newly arrived soldiers to begin to understand the areas where they operate. Short surges would redeploy them just as they began to be effective.

In addition, a short surge would play into the enemy's hands.

A long and lasting escalation is not a "surge." If that's what Bush is calling this proposal, then this is a massive bait and switch scheme.

too, of course.

sipping champagne and enjoying the cool summer breezes with Bill Kristol, et al.

"Let them eat bullets."