The Los Angeles Times reports support has coalesced behind a plan for a substantial buildup in U.S. troops to Iraq, an increase in industrial aid to create jobs, and a major anti-Sadr combat offensive.
Military officials, including some advising the chiefs, have argued that an intensified effort may be the only way to get the counterinsurgency strategy right and provide a chance for victory.The approach overlaps somewhat a course promoted by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz). But the Pentagon proposals add several features, including the confrontation with Sadr, a possible renewed offensive in the Sunni stronghold of Al Anbar province, a large Iraqi jobs program and a proposal for a long-term increase in the size of the military.
Such an option would appear to satisfy Bush's demand for a strategy focused on victory rather than disengagement.
Increasing the number of U.S. forces in Iraq will likely require a permanent increase in the size of the Army and the Marines in order to avoid remobilizing the National Guard and sending reserve combat units back to Iraq. According to the Times, a proposal is being considered to combine a surge with a quick buildup of the Marines and the Army.
I remain one the unrepentant supporters of the war. I still firmly believe that we that there is no acceptable outcome but victory. In my view you can not declare victory and march off the field. We tried that in Vietnam and, well it didn't work. Nevertheless, I am very mindful that we must not ask our troops to fight the war if the public does not support it. The question becomes will the public rally around doing something big in the war that has a chance for victory, or have we already given up and accepted defeat.
I hope the BA does something along these lines. I'm with you on our Iraq policy. Public opinion is a fickle thing, and might turn if we make a real effort to get Al Sadr, as well as some of the other thugs. Still, the opposition to Iraq is nowhere near what it was to Vietnam. This is why I still have hope.
Great post, CY!
Posted by: Chris Leavitt | Thursday, December 14, 2006 at 03:18 PM