The hanging of Saddam Hussein did not change anything, but it did illuminate the deeply sectarian nature of this government. If it were my choice, I would not “surge” American troops in defense of such a government.- Charles Krauthammer
When you’ve lost Charles Krauthammer, you’ve lost pretty much everyone. It’s over. It’s time to start bringing our troops home.
Yet, Krauthammer cannot bring himself to draw that conclusion. Rather than concede defeat he wants to keep the airport and a bunch of military bases and ‘be there to pick up the pieces’ when the civil war plays itself out. I don’t know what could better demonstrate the ultimate aims of the neo-cons.
If we had zero American casualties a day, there would be as little need to withdraw from Iraq as there is to withdraw from the Balkans.
We need to find a redeployment strategy that maintains as much latent American strength as possible, but with minimal exposure. We say to Maliki: Let us down, and we dismantle the Green Zone, leave Baghdad and let you fend for yourself; we keep the airport and certain strategic bases in the area; we redeploy most of our forces to Kurdistan; we maintain a significant presence in Anbar province, where we are having success in our one-front war against al-Qaeda and the Baathists. Then we watch. You can have your Baghdad civil war without us. We will be around to pick up the pieces as best we can.
So at the end of four years of failed policy Krauthammer thinks we can occupy Baghdad’s airport and keep military bases throughout Iraq and just sit around idly watching Iraqis slaughter each other. When they get tired of slaughtering people we will emerge from the airport and remote bases to pick up the pieces.
Thank you for laying out Dick Cheney’s moral universe for us, Charles. I’m very impressed.
if only Plan B existed before Krauthammer was conceived, his mother could have spared the rest of us.
</snark>
Good ol’ SauerKraut. Wretchedly wrong on everythign every wretched day of his wretched life.
Do I hear Krauthammer agreeing with Murtha?
We say to Maliki: Let us down, and we dismantle the Green Zone, leave Baghdad and let you fend for yourself;…
Hay Charles, are you sure that it just shouldn’t be dissembled?
I read the snippets of Krauthammer you included in your posting and thought to myself, “surely there must be some context in which these remarks were made which would give some more clarification”. So I hopped on over the WP link and read the whole commentary. It was more ghastly than I had even imagined it could possibly be.
“By November, his six months were up, and the verdict was clear: He could not. His government is hopelessly sectarian. It protects Sadr, as we saw dramatically when Maliki ordered the lifting of U.S. barricades set up around Sadr City in search of a notorious death squad leader. It is enmeshed with Iran, as we saw when Maliki’s government forced us to release Iranian agents found in the compound of one of his coalition partners.”
And it is a surprise to anyone that out of the chaos handed to Maliki by his American “liberators” that anything other than this is the result? This prediction was widely made by many a Democrat and liberal alike in the run-up and start of this war. And Krauthammer and all his ilk roundly berated and smugly dismissed such talk as partisan blather and a defeatist mentality.
“Petraeus wants to change the U.S. counterinsurgency strategy, at least in Baghdad, from simply hunting terrorists to securing neighborhoods. In other words, from search-and-destroy to stay-and-protect. He thinks that he can do this with only a modest increase of five American brigades.”
The very policy Bush 41 and many in his administration who are also now in GW’s inner circle said would result in major, uncontrollable and long term bloodbath in the city of Baghdad. This is an already disproven idea regardless of what Patraeus “thinks”.
“We need to define that intermediate strategy. Right now there are only three policies on the table: (1) the surge, which a majority of Congress opposes, (2) the status quo, which everybody opposes, and (3) the abandonment of Iraq, which appears to be the default Democratic alternative.”
Well……..this is just a damn lie, that’s all I can say.
“We need to find a redeployment strategy that maintains as much latent American strength as possible, but with minimal exposure. We say to Maliki: Let us down, and we dismantle the Green Zone, leave Baghdad and let you fend for yourself; we keep the airport and certain strategic bases in the area; we redeploy most of our forces to Kurdistan; we maintain a significant presence in Anbar province, where we are having success in our one-front war against al-Qaeda and the Baathists. Then we watch. You can have your Baghdad civil war without us. We will be around to pick up the pieces as best we can.”
Well that’s just fine and dandy! We’re going to just hang around till the dust settles, take what we want ( meaning oil) and let the Iraqis that remain fend for themselves. Somehow I can’t believe the Kurds really want the terrorist magnets (American troops) setting up shop in their neck of the woods. Of course, we just tell them that’s the way it is, tough shit! Another victory in winning hearts and minds.
Krauthammer’s words have to be about the most asinine ever published by a “literate” human being. But being wrong up to this point on everything concerning Iraq obviously makes his view one of keen insight and intellect, right? What an absolute joke this man is. I wish we could be spared his lunatic ravings. But I fear in todays bizarro world that is not going to happen.
Krauthammer has been calling for blood for twenty years. He’s been a leading voice of the military option for decades. It is interesting to hear him admit defeat, in so many words. Looks like he might just have to rethink. Nah! Expecting moral reasoning from him is like expecting moral reasoning from a cat. They don’t have it in them. He’ll be calling for war in Iraq and/or Syria by Monday.