For the past few weeks I have grown increasingly frustrated with the Democratic response to the "Surge" debate. Repeatedly, McCain and the complicit media have harped on the surge being a "success" and Obama's alleged "unwillingness" or "stubbornness" in admitting what a great success the surge was and -- by implication -- what a great "success" Iraq is becoming.
Obama's response has been accurate as he attempts to distinguish military tactics from an overarching strategy -- but his answers have been far too wordy and complex to allow that "soundbite response" that reaches the average voter, who may devote only limited time to consideration of these complex issues.
I hoped the "surge" issue would just fade, but sure enough, on Sunday I saw a headline on an AP story in my local paper saying "At Last, America is Winning." So I decided to diary this issue and see if we Kossacks can put our collective heads together and come up with that winning "soundbite" response for the campaign.
Follow me below the fold and let's explore some pithy responses that the Obama campaign may want to consider.
This diary is not meant as an in-depth analysis of the surge or a debate on all the misstatements made by Senator McCain in describing when the surge started -- pre or post the Awakening -- or whether it had any influence beyond Baghdad, for example in Anbar. I am not an expert on military combat, and I still have to stop and remember -- ok, Shite are the majority like in Iran, Sunnis the minority ones who used to rule under Saddam Hussein -- so I have some empathy for the occasional gaffe by a politician, not to mention enormous admiration for those (like Obama) who have a profound grasp of the issues and the players. But this surge thing is driving me crazy.
The addition of 30,000 troops was a TACTICAL decision to bring down violence in Baghdad. Along with the Sunni Awakening (they woke up and said let's kick those asshole A-Q terrorists out because they're fucking up our country) and the diminishing number of mixed (Sunni/Shite) neighborhoods due to previous ethnic cleansing by both sides in the Civil War -- and leaving out the issue of the possible tweaking of some statistical measures for reporting dead and wounded -- the additional troops obviously, happily, wonderfully, helped reduce the level of violence in Baghdad to apparently more "tolerable levels" for a war zone. Even Gen. Petraeus isn't calling it a done deal, but apparently we can all agree that violence is down.
SO THE SURGE WAS A SUCCESSFUL TACTIC -- HOW DOES THAT CHANGE IN ANY WAY THE STRATEGIC DISASTER THAT IS THE IRAQ WAR?
Our objective in going into Iraq was (allegedly) WMDs, then toppling Saddam, then Democracy spreading throughout the Middle East, then containing Iran, then whatever. It doesn't matter how the objective is phrased -- clearly the overarching, fundamental goal was supposed to be TO MAKE AMERICA SAFER. (I never thought it would do that, but I'm just stating the proposition.)
In that regard, Iraq has been a disaster. It was a disaster from the beginning, and it continues to be a disaster. It was a political and strategic blunder that, by most sane estimates, will take us decades to repair in terms of our standing in the world, in terms of our economy, in terms of our constitutional rights, in terms of our ability to lead on such issues as democratic principles and human rights. And it did absolutely nothing to make us safer. To the contrary, it has made us less safe, fanned the flames of extremism and terrorism, been used as a recruiting tool by the jihadists, and strengthened Iran into a regional powerhouse and possibly a nuclear power.
So why doesn't Obama or one of his surrogates say something simple and straightforward like:
"A Tactical Success Cannot Salvage a Policy Disaster." Or (if he has to acknowledge the "surge" word:
"The surge was a tactical success in support of a strategic disaster." Or
"Adding more troops to the Titanic can only bail you out so long." Or
"Invading Iraq was a Historic Strategic Blunder. Quelling Violence in Baghdad doesn't Change That."
O.K., Kossacks, you get the picture. Vote for your favorite soundbite response regarding the "surge," and, even more important, add your own suggestions. Remember -- keep it simple. If we get enough response on this diary, I'll update to add the best comments, in the hopes that the Obama campaign has someone who will pay attention and pass the soundbite on.