Down In Flames

by hilzoy

Reuters:

"Just weeks after pledging a new approach in the Iraq war in the wake of his party's defeat in congressional elections, U.S. President George W. Bush seems to be digging in his heels against any major change of course. (...)

"He is now caught between admitting the war was a mistake and his policy has failed, or trying to tough it out," said Joseph Cirincione, a foreign policy analyst at the Center for American Progress, a liberal Washington think tank.

"It looks like the president would rather let the whole operation go down in flames than admit he was wrong.""

It's not just "the whole operation." It's people's lives.

David Ignatius tries to convince himself that Bush is bleeding inside, and concludes:

"He is making a vast wager -- of American lives, treasure and the nation's security -- that his judgments about Iraq were right. The Baker-Hamilton report gave him a chance to take some chips off the table, but Bush doesn't seem interested. He is still playing to win. The audience is shouting out advice, but the man under the spotlight knows he will have to make this decision alone."

Bush is making a vast wager, but he is not playing to win. He never has been. He is trying to avoid having to admit failure. That's a different matter entirely.

Comments

[bob mcmanus]

Rather See the Whole Thing ...Col Pat Lang, again. From the comments:

"There will be no talks with Iran or Syria, and when the veneers of carefully constructed bullshit are stripped off this plan, it's obvious that its implementation requires the destruction of whole Iraqi neighbourhoods and the killing of any males of military age that attempt to escape.

There is no other way of "rapidly clearing and holding" an area and disarming the militias.

The rosy picture painted by Kagan is one of squads going from house to house and knocking on doors, searching houses for weapons, and questioning the occupants.

I respectfully suggest that after the first three squads have knocked on doors in Sadr City, only to be met by an IED, and discovered that the only way to remove an AK47 from an Iraqi is to pry it from his cold dead hands, they will adopt the "Rattenkrieg" (rat war) tactics used by the Germans in Stalingrad.

For the record that means an HE round from a tank or gun into the house, followed by the killing of whatever runs out of the rubble.

The only question to me is will Iran stand idly by while this happens?" ...'walrus'

"Walrus

"Rattenkrieg" seems likely. pl

Posted by: W. Patrick Lang | 27 December 2006 at 05:41 PM "

[KCinDC]

I'm surprised that the Carpetbagger seems to be the only blogger who's pointed out that Ignatius's mention of LBJ's trouble sleeping doesn't apply to Bush at all.

[sglover]

Like most WaPo op-eds, Ignatius' column was just an embarrassment. But like most WaPo op-ed columnists, self-abasement is all part of a days work for Ignatius. It's why he makes the big bucks.

[cleek]

just wanted to share a link this blog. it's from a US soldier in Iraq who goes by the name 'Milo Freeman'. great stuff.

(via B.L.)

[Pooh]

That's a nice link Cleek, thanks.

[PartisanJ]

Making a vast wager? WTF?! It's not a big gamble if you pony up other people's money and loved ones for the bet. Hey -- I bet you I can win the war on terror. If I lose, that guy over there dies...