Pulling Out of Iraq

(Hat tip: Betsy Newmark.)

Here's a piece by a senior editor at The New Republic, on Congressional ignorance about Iraq, and its disregard of the consequences of a pull-out.

May 4, 2007 -- WHEN Nancy Pelosi confessed last year that she felt "sad" about President Bush's claims that al Qaeda operates in Iraq, she seemed to be disputing what every American soldier in Iraq, every al Qaeda operative and anyone who reads a newspaper already knew to be true. (When I questioned him about Pelosi's assertion, a U.S. officer in Ramadi responded, incredulously, that al Qaeda had just held a parade in his sector.)

Perhaps the House speaker was alluding to the discredited claim that al Qaeda operated in Iraq before the war. Perhaps. But the insinuation that al Qaeda's depredations in Iraq might be something other than what they appear has become a staple of the congressional debate over Iraq.

Thus, to buttress his own case for withdrawal, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said, "We have to change course [away from Iraq] and turn our attention back to the war on al Qaeda and their allies" - the clear message being that neither plays much of a role there.

What is going on here? Two possibilities: First, Reid and Pelosi could be purposefully minimizing the stakes in Iraq. Or, second, they don't know what they're talking about. My guess is some combination of the two.

They don't know what they're talking about? Well...

YOU don't need to cherry-pick quotes to prove the point: Nearly every time a senator's mouth opens, something wrong comes out.

A typical example came a few weeks ago. In a Washington Post op-ed responding to an equally surreal op-ed by Sen. John McCain, Sen. Joseph Biden wrote: "The most damning evidence that the 'results' McCain cites are illusory is the city of Tal Afar. Architects of the president's plan called it a model because in 2005, a surge of about 10,000 Americans and Iraqis pacified the city. Then we left Tal Afar, just as our troops soon will leave the Baghdad neighborhoods that they have calmed."

A minor detail perhaps, but "we" never left Tal Afar. In 2006, the First Brigade of the First Armored Division replaced the Third Armored Cavalry Regiment, actually boosting the number of Americans in the city. Biden's analysis will also come as news for the 25th Infantry Division, whose soldiers were patrolling the streets of Tal Afar even as the senator claimed otherwise.

Not to single Biden out: Who can forget Rep. John Murtha's suggestion that it would be a cinch for American forces to "redeploy" from Iraq to nearby Okinawa, 5,000 miles from Baghdad?

U.S. officers in Iraq say that, during their briefings to visiting delegations, they routinely find themselves subjected to examples of congressional oversight along the lines of: Is (the northern city of) Mosul east or west of Baghdad? What's the difference between a brigade and battalion?

Speaking of "where things stand on the ground in Iraq," Reid insisted that the role of U.S. forces is to train Iraqi security forces, protect U.S. troops and conduct targeted counter-terrorism operations: "This transitions our mission to one that is aligned with U.S. strategic interests, while at the same time reducing our combat footprint. U.S. troops should not be interjecting themselves between warring factions, kicking down doors, trying to sort Shia from Sunni, friend from foe."

There are several problems with this formulation, not the least of which is that, far from being a "new strategy," it mirrors exactly the approach that was tested and found wanting when Donald Rumsfeld was presiding over the war and "reducing our combat footprint" was a raison d'etre. Chaos, not stability, was the result.

WHERE all this leads is clear. Piece together a string of demonstrably false "facts on the ground" from a suitably safe remove, and you're left with a scenario where we can walk away from Iraq without condition and regardless of consequence.

You don't need to watch terrified Iraqis pleading for American forces to stay put in their neighborhoods. You don't need to read the latest National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq, which anticipates that a precipitous U.S. withdrawal will end in catastrophe. Why, in the serene conviction that things are the other way around, you don't even need to read at all. Chances are, your congressman doesn't either.

Bad theories kill people.