![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
How To Get Out of a No-Win Situation
Jul. 7th, 2007 11:47 pmI've been seeing more and more stories that are bringing up the "Broken Army" clock. It's a timetable for when our armed forces will be pushed beyond their limits, and start becoming ineffective. Time's Joe Klein has one here.
The problem isn't all with the fact we've had our forces on several tours in Iraq and Afganistan, including extended 15 month tours. There's also the factor that military equipment, much of it designed for shorter strikes, is breaking down much faster than expected. Of course, the Iraqi forces aren't ready to take our place, because there's not a desire to replace the American forces. It's easier to oppose them than to actually take command of the country.
If months now, calls for the president's administration to set timelines have been greeted by the president's standard refrain that a timeline for withdrawal just gives the enemy a timeline to wait it out. Well, it's seems that there's no stated timeline needed. Shias, Shites, other forces in the country knew all along the goal was to wait out the occupation. They counted more on our growing discontent, but it's our lack of ability that will send us packing.
What's sad is we look weak, just when we don't need to. We look weak for going in and getting bogged down in something we shouldn't have done in the first place. We may posture against Iran and North Korea, but except for bombing raids, can we really put the fear into them to keep them in line, since we have so little diplomatic credit?
What will be interesting is to see how the administration spins a troop reduction in Iraq. will it be the "strategic redeployment" that's been called for, or will we suddenly try to declare "Mission Accomplished!" once again? While Bush and his administration seem to be oblivious or at least in denial about their actions, it's going to be tough for other Republicans who will be out on the 2008 campaign trail to find a way to spin this.
How does one say now that we have to wind it down, without admitting the obvious, we can't take on a foe without making bigger sacrifice. With 2008 in the balance, now's not the time to ask for a draft, and it would take months to demand more equipment with money we're already borrowing at too fast of a rate.
It's over, but it's not. The surge cannot sustain itself and we're going to start withdrawal. Just how fast, how much, and what it will labeled as are the questions.
I wish we could go back to the 80's where it was the Soviet Union was in this mess and not us.
The problem isn't all with the fact we've had our forces on several tours in Iraq and Afganistan, including extended 15 month tours. There's also the factor that military equipment, much of it designed for shorter strikes, is breaking down much faster than expected. Of course, the Iraqi forces aren't ready to take our place, because there's not a desire to replace the American forces. It's easier to oppose them than to actually take command of the country.
If months now, calls for the president's administration to set timelines have been greeted by the president's standard refrain that a timeline for withdrawal just gives the enemy a timeline to wait it out. Well, it's seems that there's no stated timeline needed. Shias, Shites, other forces in the country knew all along the goal was to wait out the occupation. They counted more on our growing discontent, but it's our lack of ability that will send us packing.
What's sad is we look weak, just when we don't need to. We look weak for going in and getting bogged down in something we shouldn't have done in the first place. We may posture against Iran and North Korea, but except for bombing raids, can we really put the fear into them to keep them in line, since we have so little diplomatic credit?
What will be interesting is to see how the administration spins a troop reduction in Iraq. will it be the "strategic redeployment" that's been called for, or will we suddenly try to declare "Mission Accomplished!" once again? While Bush and his administration seem to be oblivious or at least in denial about their actions, it's going to be tough for other Republicans who will be out on the 2008 campaign trail to find a way to spin this.
How does one say now that we have to wind it down, without admitting the obvious, we can't take on a foe without making bigger sacrifice. With 2008 in the balance, now's not the time to ask for a draft, and it would take months to demand more equipment with money we're already borrowing at too fast of a rate.
It's over, but it's not. The surge cannot sustain itself and we're going to start withdrawal. Just how fast, how much, and what it will labeled as are the questions.
I wish we could go back to the 80's where it was the Soviet Union was in this mess and not us.
