HOME | BIO | MUSIC | JOURNEYS BY DJ | STUDIO BLOG | POLITICAL BLOG | BOOKING INFO | CONTACT

If rumors on the Sunday Morning Talk Shows and The Blogs are to be believed, Bush is going to announce his approval for one final "surge" of troops in Iraq next year.

Now I don't know about you, but when I hear the word "surge," I think of something short term. Two, three months. Maybe four. Apparently I don't know the meaning of surge.

Via DailyKos, here's Fred Kagan, the genius over at the American Enterprise Institute, on the details of his plan:

We're proposing a surge of 4 brigades, which is about 20,000 American combat troops into Baghdad and a number more, totaling about 35,000 American combat troops into other places in Iraq...

I think that there's going to have to be a sustained surge through the end of the Bush presidency. I think it's a real mistake to imagine that we can do this with some sort of temporary bump and then pull back quickly.

Got that? We're talking about a two year surge, not a two month one.

Thankfully, Kagan has produced and distributed (via Pat Lang) a handy PowerPoint Presentation so that we can all play along at home. Let's take a look at the genius that is Kagan's work:

Page 2:

• 1.4 million troops under arms / 140,000 in Iraq
• America contained ethno-religious conflict and civil war in Bosnia and Kosovo—we can do so in Iraq
• American resources are great: 300 million people, $12 trillion in GDP compared to 25 million Iraqis, $100 billion Iraqi GDP in a country the size of California
• Success requires effort and will, but we need not choose to lose

All hail the greatness that is America! By sheer force of will and size we will succeed!

Never mind that the founding of our own nation disproves his "Goliath always beats David" theory of international relations. Or, for that matter, the British experience in India. Or the French experience in Algeria. Or the Russian experience in Afghanistan. Or...

From a slide entitled "Victory is Vital":

Failure in Iraq will likely lead to: –Widespread regional conflict –Humanitarian catastrophe –Terrorist sanctuaries –Further radicalization of the Muslim World –Loss of American credibility globally –Damage to the morale of the U.S. military

Would have been nice is Mr. Kagan had thought about all of this a few years ago, no? Prior to the war numerous military experts and officers said that we should send in 300,000-500,000 troops, but they were dismissed out of hand. Now we're being told by the very same people who dismissed those earlier numbers that only a "surge" of 50,000 troops can save the day. If they were so obviously wrong the first time, why should we expect them to be right this time around? And more to the point, what are the people who called for more troops going in saying this time around? Shouldn't we pay more attention to the people who got it right the first time around than to the ones who dismissed them?

Take a look at page five, for example. It's entitled "Security First," and details all the ways providing security for the people of Iraq should be job number one. But think back to the days immediately following the invasion. Remember the looting? Remember how Rumsfeld dismissed it with his cavalier "stuff happens" comments?

But my favorite part of the PowerPoint comes on page 41, where a section entitled "Success Reclaims the Global Initiative" includes five bullet points, the last of which is:

WE CAN WIN IN IRAQ, AND WE MUST

Because putting things in all caps in a PowerPoint presentation shows people just how serious you are.

As for claims that the surge will break the Army, here's how page 45 counters:

• Victory increases the morale of soldiers and officers • Losing now will certainly break the force: morale, retention and intermediate readiness will all decrease

Waking up to discover magic ponies in my backyard would make me happy, but its not necessarily something I should plan my morning around, right?

And call me crazy, but spending Christmas at home with their families might increase the morale of soldiers and officers too. As would, for that matter, not fighting a war that they know the American people no longer support.

One last slide and then I'll let this go. Page 50 of 52: "Will the Shia Militias Get Stronger?"

Kagan's answer:

Plan removes the rationale for Shia militias

Its the "Power Point as Magic Wand" Theory of international relations! Brilliant!

How badly will these people have to fail before people stop taking them seriously? How many more Americans are going to have to die? How many more Iraqi lives are going to have to end?