Look folks - this is pretty simple. Either the the Iraq insurgency is in its last throes, as the Vice President says, and we can plan to start bringing the troops home soon; or it's going to be necessary to stay the course in Iraq for the next two years - and I think we can assume that "no timetable" for withdrawal means at least two years at current troop levels - because of the strength of the resistance.
Unless the point of keeping our troops in Iraq indefinitely is to give them time enough to savor the wonders of Mesopotamian civilization past & present, you just can't have it both ways. Will someone please press the White House on this point?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Derek, don't forget the implication, which Krugman made a point of this morning: if the insurgency is not in its last throes, we won't have the troops to send in a year, because we aren't recruiting the people needed.
Which means either a draft in a year, or we simply watch Iraq swallowed by the insurgency, as we loose more and more of our soldiers -- friends and children -- over there.
Post a Comment