Jimmie brings the news… which will probably cause some panic among Democratic leaders: John Murtha says that the surge is working:
Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), one of the leading anti-war voices in the House Democratic Caucus, is back from a trip to Iraq and he now says the “surge is working.” This could be a huge problem for Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and other Democratic leaders, who are blocking approval of the full $200 billion being sought by President Bush for combat operations in Iraq in 2008.
Murtha’s latest comments are also a stark reversal from what he said earlier in the year. The Pennsylvania Democrat, who chairs the powerful Defense Subcommittee on the House Appropriations Committee, has previously stated that the surge “is not working” and the United States faced a military disaster in Iraq.
Back in July of this year Murtha said the following about the surge and Bush’s words that it’s working: “Well it’s delusional to say the least. As I said earlier, and you heard me say it, it’s a failed policy wrapped in illusion. Nothing’s gotten better. Incidents have increased. We have had more Americans killed in the last four months than any other period during the war.”
A top House Democratic aide, speaking on the condition of anonymity told the Politico: “This could be a real headache for us. Pelosi is going to be furious.”
And rightfully so, of course, The sad part is that Pelosi will be furious with Murtha for him telling the truth. All evidence indicates that the surge is indeed working. That doesn’t mean that Iraq will be stable and peaceful within two months time, but it does mean that the strategy adopted by Bush this year is paying off and that it may be wise for the US to hang in there a while longer.
O, it also means that the Democrats were wrong.
O, and that they can’t deliver on their promise to withdraw the troops asap.
It’s amazing to see how the political landscape has changed. A couple of months ago Bush had no credibility left, Republicans were waiting to jump from the sinking ship… now, Democrats suddenly have a problem and a consensus is emerging that the surge is, truly, working. Suddenly, Republicans like John McCain don’t look so bad anymore, do they?
“I think the ’surge’ is working,” the Democrat said in a videoconference from his Johnstown office, describing the president’s decision to commit more than 20,000 additional combat troops this year. But the Iraqis “have got to take care of themselves.”
Violence has dropped significantly in recent months, but Mr. Murtha said he was most encouraged by changes in the once-volatile Anbar province, where locals have started working closely with U.S. forces to isolate insurgents linked to Al Qaeda…
Mr. Murtha’s four day-trip took him to a Thanksgiving dinner with troops in Kuwait last Thursday, and he then made stops in Iraq, Turkey and Belgium.
Gaius comments: “The fracture of the Democrats over this will be fast and ugly. I expect there is going to be a real donnybrook in the next leadership meeting. Pelosi is scheduled to speak to the DNC on Friday - reporters will be waiting for her. This is going to be fun to watch.”
Ed Morrissey: “Their anti-war legislative position has now almost completely eroded, and Murtha has exposed Pelosi to another spectacular failure.”
Heh. I almost feel sorry for Nancy.
Too bad they didn’t focus on accountability for mistakes and corruption in the way the war’s been prosecuted. Could have been a win-win for everyone.
This is the most pathetic display of wishful thinking, shifting of goalposts and faux-vindicative squealing I have seen since a random lefty blog uncovered the latest display of “xenophobia and insanity” from some republican which would turn away the voters and bring about 24 years of undisturbed DNC dominion.
Murtha is simply wrong - the surge works in the sense that the finger in the dike that is the troop increase managed to stem the deaths - big fornicating surprise! But a finger in the dike (the tactics) is only worth anything if the people who own the dike and the surroundings are willing to create something before the finger and the person with said finger in the dike runs out of will and resources (the strategy). And? Guess what - the dike-owners and their respective representatives are still about as close to reconciliation as they are to Betelgeuse. The tactics worked excellently and the strategy moved forward with all the tenacity with which nails grow.
So the surge isn’t working, and Murtha’s rhetorical backtracking only displays the typical democrat tendency to speak beyond one’s facts and apologetically bucking to demands of not harming the effort lest one looks as if one is rooting for bad news. Or he is sincere in which case he is just ignorant.
Guess what - right before Tet in ‘68 the US government invited every journalist available to see all the delicious, promising statistics out of South Vietnam. The numbers, of course, had nothing to do with strategy or US interests, but they looked great.
The only thing I can agree on is that this could represent a completely unwarranted schism in thinking on democrat’s part. Hopefully Murtha is an outlier.
About that whole “mistakes…in the way the war’s been prosecuted” thing, I’ve been wondering.
What, exactly, is the learning curve on helping to turn a tyranny into a free and open constitutional democracy. Not that I’m intentionally targeting you C Stanley on this, but your comment kind of coaxed the questions out of me. I mean, how many mistakes are too many and where might one turn to find where it has been done successfully, considering that it’s never even been attempted in the entire history of the world?
This preoccupation with the “mistakes” and lack of slack for a President who is trying to do an immensely good thing that has never been done before gets under my skin. The Iraqis managed to write and ratify a Constitution in two years. It took us 11. No Arab country has ever written and ratified their own Constitution - not ever. But all we can think to do is bang the President for making well-intentioned and pretty well-informed mistakes?
Xel - You are factually incorrect. We have direct observations from folks reporting on the ground such as Michael Yon, Michael Totten, Bill Ardolino, and Nicholas Burns that reconciliation is indeed happening. it’s happening in towns and cities and neighborhoods. Sunni and Shia, Christian and Muslim are working together to secure their neighborhoods, reopen businesses, rebuild churches, and govern themselves. The government is being built from the ground up, which is exactly the way a successful democracy is built. The surge, specifically what General Petraeus did with the extra troops, is directly responsible for that.
If the Bush administration made any mistake where it should have known better, it was in building the Iraqi government from the top-down. They gave in to the “big, strong Federal government” conceit that many big-government lovers here in the US have. Had they read their Federalist Papers or their Democracy in America, they would at least seen the potential flaws in their plan.
But there’s no way that anyone can say that political progress and reconciliation is not happening. It’s not happening at the very top of the government but, frankly, the very top of the government is the least important part of what’s happening in Iraq today.
Jimmie,
I’m your natural ally on this, not a Bush basher. But I have sympathy for the one current in the antiwar crowd which wants to make sure things like Abu Graib never happen again, and wants to make sure we realize that the Iraq War shouldn’t have been entered into with the idea that it would be a cake walk, and that the corruption that took place on the CPA’s watch was inexcusable. Credit where credit is due, but accountability where it’s due as well.
Oh, and on bottom up vs. top down as you discussed it in comment 4, I agree completely. Not only is the surge working to provide room for this to happen, but we also seem to have learned that top down doesn’t work.
“We have direct observations from folks reporting on the ground such as Michael Yon, Michael Totten, Bill Ardolino, and Nicholas Burns that reconciliation is indeed happening. it’s happening in towns and cities and neighborhoods. Sunni and Shia, Christian and Muslim are working together to secure their neighborhoods, reopen businesses, rebuild churches, and govern themselves. The government is being built from the ground up, which is exactly the way a successful democracy is built. The surge, specifically what General Petraeus did with the extra troops, is directly responsible for that.”
I’m hearing everything on Iraq. The whole gamut, but what I’ve heard that runs contrary to success has been reality-based.
“But there’s no way that anyone can say that political progress and reconciliation is not happening. It’s not happening at the very top of the government but, frankly, the very top of the government is the least important part of what’s happening in Iraq today.”
Yes way there is.
Anyway, I have said before that priority one is seeing the happiness of the Iraqis ensured and seeing the incompetent, unquestioning, mistake-sanctioning and indiscriminately war-supporting GOP suffer in all senses applicable is priority two - if I can’t have one without two then I won’t complain but if one is sadly the case then at least I am not wrong for aiming to see two become reality as well.
I agree that bottom-up stabilization is the way to go, if this is happening, and I agree that if this is the case the tactics meshed with strategy.
Yeah we liberals are really crapping ourselves. After a five year ground war with the people of Iraq, no weapons of mass destruction, ethnic cleansing, no connections to Al Qaeda, 4000 dead soldiers, 600 billion gone, with an eventual bill of 2.4 trillion. Let me tell you, egg on our face.
No question here, Stanley, that we need to hold folks accountable. I’d say that the right folks were held accountable for Abu Ghraib and the CPA corruption. I mean, the folks involved are out of work or are being punished for their crimes. The President was in charge for both the wrongs and the corrections to those wrongs was reelected by a record number of voters and the first majority since his father was elected. I’d say the American people made it pretty clear that they were satisfied with how he handled it - at least satisfied enough that they didn’t fire him and hire the other guy.
The thing is, we can never be sure that Abu Ghraib will never happen again. Our military is full of human beings who will do stupid and wrong things. The very best we can do is to make sure that when that happens, we move swiftly to investigate what happened and to punish the people who did wrong. What more can we really do?
“and wants to make sure we realize that the Iraq War shouldn’t have been entered into with the idea that it would be a cake walk”
It shouldn’t have been entered into at all.
“and that the corruption that took place on the CPA’s watch was inexcusable. Credit where credit is due, but accountability where it’s due as well.”
Exactly, and if the parts of the GOP that rooted for the war with a reasonable, bipartisan and positive “wait and see we have one last thing we can try” rhetoric earns credit then I will give it.
“Not only is the surge working to provide room for this to happen”
Once again I have heard everything on Iraq - the damn thing is akin to guns/crime statistics or the healthcare issue; everybody seems to have numbers on their side all the time.
“but we also seem to have learned that top down doesn’t work.”
The US has had since Vietnam to learn this - to make another experiment out of another country before learning that is frankly horrible.
Xel- I’ll stick my neck out and make a prediction. I think we’ll see increasing local stabilization and organization of true local representation- followed by a tense and hard fought reconciliation at the national level. If the US can hang in long enough, if enough progress is made with Iraqi security forces (or perhaps eventually some supplementation by UN or other international forces) as the US begins to withdraw. Oh, and if diplomatic channels are used effectively to keep the regional powers playing nicely, so they don’t disrupt the whole process.
Not saying this will happen in 6 months, of course. I’d say it will take at least 18-24 months- and the time of reckoning will be the next national election (that’s Jan ‘09 if I’m not mistaken).
Jimmie,
On what more we can do, I’d say that’s the point of hearings and investigations. To find out what systemic factors might be able to be changed to make sure the chain of command works to root out the rogue individuals who do harm.
And my main point really was that strategically, if the Dems had focused on these things, they’d be in a much stronger position right now. They’d have given some red meat to the anti-war (not that it’d be enough, but would whet their appetite) and they wouldn’t be in the position of having to backtrack as Murtha’s doing. They’d also have looked great from the perspective of supporting the troops- what better way to support them then to focus on accountability for their commanders?
“After a five year ground war with the people of Iraq, no weapons of mass destruction, ethnic cleansing, no connections to Al Qaeda, 4000 dead soldiers, 600 billion gone, with an eventual bill of 2.4 trillion. Let me tell you, egg on our face.”
But for fairness sake they may have been correct *since the surge*. I think even positive developments in Iraq can’t help the GOP much anyway - the media has let go and the democrats only get stick over not pulling out from DKos, which isn’t mainstream (albeit not fringe either). The democrats have some chickens coming home to roost regarding Iraq, but the GOP has trillions of chickens, which may alarm just *a few* people.
I still think the bloodbath threat was weakened by the fact that Iraq has been a blood-shower for such a long time, but there is no denying that in an unfair sense Iraq isn’t Bush’s war but actually the war of innocent Iraqis as well. Now I definitely think sticking it to Bush without considering the effects for the Iraqi population is just as bad as screaming for a glorious enlightened invasion of them without considering the consequences of said invasion.
the surge is working = 2.0 seconds…
The rest of Murtha’s press debriefing = 10 minutes 57 seconds…
Context much?
It would be refreshing to see how much the context of Murtha’s debriefing would better frame the rabid right’s “Pelosi’s got a problem” meme, but that would require some serious and objective digging into the transcript. That would be real journalism, which seems to have become somewhat of a lost art…
The shorter Murtha is here…
See for yourself the actual context of the Murtha quote, and then decide for yourself whether or not the latest meme being bandied about is nothing more than a disembodied quote being raised as a cudgel by a very non-Murtha agenda…
“I’ll stick my neck out and make a prediction. I think we’ll see increasing local stabilization and organization of true local representation- followed by a tense and hard fought reconciliation at the national level. If the US can hang in long enough, if enough progress is made with Iraqi security forces (or perhaps eventually some supplementation by UN or other international forces) as the US begins to withdraw. Oh, and if diplomatic channels are used effectively to keep the regional powers playing nicely, so they don’t disrupt the whole process.”
I’m not going to hold you out on it, but thanks for giving me your rationale for your position.
“Not saying this will happen in 6 months, of course. I’d say it will take at least 18-24 months- and the time of reckoning will be the next national election (that’s Jan ‘09 if I’m not mistaken).”
You mean November ‘08? Anyway, the final tally should still leave the GOP in worse shape than the democrats.
That is a good point, Jim et al. Just when I thought Murtha was making sense, I see that he’s not as lucid as I thought he was. In short, he seems to say- we have a window of opportunity to close the window.
Xel, your last statement is quite reasonable, but it’s also quite sad that you’d need to say that- it should be a given. And sad that for some people, it isn’t.
“See for yourself the actual context of the Murtha quote, and then decide for yourself whether or not the latest meme being bandied about is nothing more than a disembodied quote being raised as a cudgel by a very non-Murtha agenda…”
The dems are flailing and crumbling they are wrong The dems are flailing and crumbling they are wrongAll workThe dems are flailing and crumbling they are wrongand no pLayThe dems are flailing and crumbling they are wrongThe dems are flailing and crumbling they are wrongMakes Ann Coulter A DullThe dems are flailing and crumbling they are wrongThe dems are flailing and crumbling they are wrongThe dems are flailing and crumbling they are wrongBoy
“Xel, your last statement is quite reasonable, but it’s also quite sad that you’d need to say that- it should be a given. And sad that for some people, it isn’t.”
Both the left and right have been playing politics with foreign people’s lives on Iraq. The left managed to avoid this until Bush managed to gridlock the US in the country and caused the Iraqis to be under such duress and risk - thus muddling the debate and making a retreat a less obvious deal. After that more on the left succumbed to bumper-stickery.
Where is John and Jane Q? Caring about how pleasant it would be to have a beer with the candidates or how hard they would hug Jesus I guess.
No, I was referring to Iraq’s national elections, not ours- but I’ve lost track of the dates. Actually it may be Dec ‘09 (four years from the Dec ‘05 elections?)
Anyway- my point is that the clock will run down on the current Iraq administration and then it’ll be time to see if local representation leads to effective national power-sharing.
“Anyway- my point is that the clock will run down on the current Iraq administration and then it’ll be time to see if local representation leads to effective national power-sharing.”
And hopefully sensible people will be chosen by the Iraqis.
Precisely, Xel- but that’s exactly why the grass roots organization has to come first. I’ve seen some Iraqi bloggers say as much in that there WERE no sensible people put up in the first election- which makes sense, since the only people with the ability to run would have been shills.
It’d be a wonderous thing if we can right even a 1/10 the wrongs we’ve visited on Iraq. But don’t, for even a second, fool yourself into thinking the invasion was a good idea because violence has dropped for a few months.
The invasion, and the continuing occupation were and are still monstrous crimes. Leaving them the hell alone as quickly as we can should still be priority #1.
CS- To some extent they have focussed on the mistakes. It was pressure from Democrats that drove Rumsfeld out, getting a reasonable man like Gates in as Sec Def was a definite turning point.
They also held hearings to investigate the excesses of Blackwater, and had Jerry Bremer testify on the money that disappeared when he was in charge of the CPA. I’m sure more could have been done, but its more than was done before they took power.
What no comments commending Murtha for his honest assessment? It took a lot of courage 2 years ago to come out against the war, but his patriotism was attacked because of his honesty. A lesser man would not have made the trip.
Wow, Congress did that before they ever convened?
LOL, sorry for the snark- fair enough to note that ‘pressure from the Dems’ brought those things about. But I was specifically talking about Pelosi/Reid’s agenda, and my feeling that they miscalculated by not putting the focus on accountability instead of weaseling over nonbinding resolutions to show that they want to bring the troops home ASAP.
On comment #24- I agree he should be commended for making the trip and for making positive statements about the effects of the surge (though I still think he makes no sense when he acknowledges that the surge has given us a window but he wants to use that window to crawl through on our way out).
Nonsense. That indicates you don’t understand Bush. At all.
He didn’t do what the Democrats wanted, he did what his fellow Republicans wanted. I don’t know whether you’ve noticed, but Bush doesn’t exactly have a record of giving in to Democrats. In fact, he hasn’t given in to them one single time as far as I can tell. It’s not his style. It’s not his approach to governing.
Hmm, I don’t know though, Michael- I guess I’d say he gave in to public sentiment (or perhaps even he personally felt that it was time for Rumsfeld to go) but if he was doing what the GOP wanted he’d have done it before the election- not doing so cost some seats in Congress.
And why did he wait? Because he didn’t want people to get the impression he was giving in to the Democrats.
I mean, come on. Bush plays politics very well actually. He has never given in to the Democrats. Instead, they’ve given in - time and again - to him. Why? When the going gets tough Bush gets even tougher and tells the democrats ‘my way or the highway.’
And he wins.
Time and again.
I agree he didn’t want to give that impression, but that’s different than actually not giving in to them. To some extent I think they did put the pressure on- and also, the public did (which is why some GOP incumbents wanted him to act sooner, because this would have made their constituents happy enough to send them back to DC).
In other words, whether Bush admits it or not doesn’t mean the Dem pressure wasn’t a major factor.
I don’t believe it was. Public pressure and GOP pressure, yes, but Democratic pressure?
No.
I would comment on this but I already did so at Stubborn Facts, and I’m not going to re-post here as I’m too lazy.
OK, let me put it this way: would there have been public pressure and GOP pressure if the Democrats hadn’t been beating the drums first? I don’t think so.
I lied. I am going to repost here. You’ll have to go to Stubborn Facts to get the Hitchens quote.
Well, the aide could disagree with the interpretation
Submitted by Tom on Fri, 11/30/2007 - 2:47pm.
Maybe the implication is that Murtha’s wrong, and the surge isn’t working? Or perhaps it’s just plain old politics, and they’re mad at Murtha for saying something that supports Bush. Hardly qualifies as “dank and sinister”
And you’ll note Hitchens said “liberals and Democrats”, not “highly placed Congressional aides”, so his target was much broader. Not that it surprises me, but it’s getting tiring to hear repeated implications that you’re a traitor because:
1. You didn’t support the Iraq War in the first place, THEN
2. You didn’t cheer loud enough when Saddam fell, THEN
3. You worried too much about the beginning insurgency THEN
4. You didn’t see that the insurgency was about to lose THEN
5. You don’t appreciate the effects of the surge.
Murtha is sublimely stupid, but not as totally clueless dumb moonbat moronic as Dingy Harry Reid & his cowgirl pal Nancy.
If the Republicans can zero in on Iraq and the Dems hatred of America, then trump it with illegal immigrants and the Dems’ carelessness with national security, THE REPUBLICANS CAM WIN IN ‘08!
Murtha is probably sensing a shift in the mind of the people voting for him.
And still what - excusing the Democrats who also enabled the war in the first place and continued it? You could go onto say - factually, that the Democrats could have stopped the entire thing as a whole. So don’t be excusing them. It’s simplicity at it’s best.
When the going gets tough Bush gets even tougher and tells the democrats ‘my way or the highway.’
And he wins.
Time and again.
And either way, the American and Iraqi people lose…
Let’s see:
- as Murtha says, the surge is working. If you look at it from a strictly military point of view. Sort of suggests that those who have been calling for a larger number of troops from the beginning might have been on to something, doesn’t it? But somehow I doubt that too many Democrats will be trashing Bush for that.
- as for meeting its primary goal (providing time for the Iraqi government to reach accomodation among the various groups in the country), it is not clear that the surge has done so. Not because it has failed to provide that time, but because apparently the Iraqi government is not yet ready to consider compromise on anything substantive. What would it take to concentrate their minds sufficiently? I have no idea — assuming it is even possible.
Unsurprisingly, partisans on both sides will mostly be trumpeting the one of these points which supports their long-standing positions on the war, while vigorously ignoring the other. Oh how I long for the days when “politics stops at the water’s edge” was the standard approach here.
“LOL, sorry for the snark- fair enough to note that ‘pressure from the Dems’ brought those things about. But I was specifically talking about Pelosi/Reid’s agenda, and my feeling that they miscalculated by not putting the focus on accountability instead of weaseling over nonbinding resolutions to show that they want to bring the troops home ASAP.”
I feel the same way - bringing the troops home isn’t completely unwarranted depending on how you look, but slowly advancing towards the DKos crowd is just stupid - you lose the chance to describe just how badly the war has been conducted while failing to please a crowd that won’t settle for anything but taking the rudder themselves.
Boy Xel, several times your quite quick to tell commentators that they have unintelligible thought process - at least not quite up to how you would like to read.
How are those double standards working for ya?
“Boy Xel, several times your quite quick to tell commentators that they have unintelligible thought process - at least not quite up to how you would like to read.”
Mmhm. I was imitating the way information is given traction and credibility in less intelligent parts of the blogosphere - echoing the unfounded notions of others and then having a most unsavory agreementfest.
That wasn’t the question.
“That wasn’t the question.”
That was recognized and completely disregarded anyway.