For those who have forgotten, the White House claimed it would achieve six objectives:
Let the Iraqis lead;
Help Iraqis protect the population;
Isolate extremists;
Create space for political progress;
Diversify political and economic efforts; and
Situate the strategy in a regional approach.
It failed.
The press worked overtime to make it a "success." McClatchy Newspapers focused on reported Iraqi fatalities for October in Baghdad, probably the worst example, but far from the only one. Rare truth came via a foreign news service, AFP reported, "The number of Iraqis killed in insurgent and sectarian attacks" note that leaves out the Iraqi civilians killed in US air strikes "rose in October, in a blow to a nine-month-old US troop surge policy. At least 887 Iraqis were killed last month, compared to 840 in September, according to the data compiled by the Iraqi government." Prior to the official start of Operation Happy Talk on Thursday, The New York Times noted the day before,
. . . Joseph A. Christoff, the director of international affairs and trade at the Government Accountability Office, said some measure of what some see as progress in Iraq were not as clear-cut as they might seem. For example, Pentagon statistic indicated that a drop in violence in Iraq over the past several months "was primarily due to a decrease in attacks against coalition forces," Mr. Christoff said in written remarks to a subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee. "Attacks against Iraqi security forces and civilians have declined less than attacks against coalition forces," Mr. Christoff wrote.
In addition, there has been no 'progress' on the political front with Iraqi politicians accomplishing little and now the central government scrambling to address the border violence between Turkey and northern Iraq.
As the mainstream rushed their stories into print in an effort to be first in riding the wave of Operation Happy Talk, they also forgot the air war. Robert Parry (Consortium News) observed that "Bush's military strategy has employed its own indiscriminate firepower -- from loose 'rules of engagement' for U.S. troops, to helicopter gun ships firing on crowds, to jet air strikes, to missiles launched from Predator drones. For instance the U.S. military acknowledged on Oct. 23 that an American helicopter killed 11 people, including women and children . . ." But who in the mainstream bothered to?
They also play dumb on the very nature of 'surge' and one of the biggest playing dumb is John McCain who can't stop lying. CNN reported last week that he was crowing, "The situation has dramatically improved." Of all the lies about the escalation, McCain's may be the most offensive.
Why?
The 'surge' was a temporary measure. The US military could not maintain it and commanders in Iraq knew it was temporary and publicly discussed this. McCain couldn't have missed that.
What he now praises is exactly what he once called out.
Maybe readers remember "Whack-a-mole (Recipe for Disaster)"?
August 3, 2006 (well before the 'surge' was announced), the following exchange took place in the Senate:
Senator John McCain: So, General Abizaid, we're moving 7,500 troops into Baghdad, is that correct?
General John Abizaid: The number is closer to 3,500.
[. . .]
McCain: And where are these troops coming from?
Abizaid: Uh, the troops, the Styker Brigade, is coming down from Mosul.
McCain: From Mosul? Is the situation under control in Ramadi?
Abizaid: Uh, the situation in Ramadi, is better than it was two months ago.McCain: Is the situation under control in Ramadi?
Abizaid: I think the situation in Ramadi is workable.
McCain: And the troops from Ramadi came from Falluja, isn't that correct?
Abizaid: I can't say senator, I know that --
McCain: Well that's my information. What I worry about is we're playing a game of whack-a-mole here. We move troops from -- It flares up, we move troops there. Everybody knows we've got big problems in Ramadi and I said, "Where you gonna get the troops?" 'Well we're going to have to move them from Falluja.' Now we're going to have to move troops into Baghdad from someplace else. It's very disturbing.
The escalation largely focused on Baghdad and Al-Anbar and now the drawdown is taking place. Exactly what is that but McCain's own definition of whack-a-mole?
Senator Crazy spoke some rare truths in August of 2006. Today he hopes America missed it or forgot it.
The 'surge' was a failure, never achieving its six objectives. It was a temporary measure that allowed the White House to play whack-a-mole and now it is winding down. It achieved nothing diplomatically and it made no lasting difference. Someone might need to ask Senator Crazy about those facts.
Illustration from Isaiah's "Bully Boy & the Showboat Express."
