Dr. J.'s Short Shot: The BushGoal for Iraq

DR. J'S SHORT SHOT
by Steven Jonas, MD, MPH

The Report of the Iraq Study Group, the independent report from senior American diplomat Andrew Cordesman, various assessments from the CIA and the Pentagon themselves, all say that the U.S. is losing, or at least losing ground, in Iraq. All agree that there has to be some kind of reasonable, rational plan for a U.S. military withdrawal from Iraq within some reasonable period of time, "victory" or no. Yet in his Dec. 20, 2006 press conference, referenced on BuzzFlash on Dec. 21, Bush said:

"Victory in Iraq is achievable . . . . It hadn't happened nearly as quickly as I hoped it would have. . . ." Confirming that he either cannot or will not read or listen, he went on to say: "But I also don't believe most Americans want us just to get out now, . . . . A lot of Americans understand the consequences of defeat [he did not define "defeat"]. Retreat would embolden radicals. It would hurt the credibility of the United States." He concluded this particular riff with: "[W]e're not winning. We're not losing. [W]e're not succeeding nearly as fast as I wanted . . . . [C]onditions are tough in Iraq, particularly in Baghdad. . . . I believe that we're going to win [he did not define "win"]. I believe that - and, by the way, if I didn't think that, I wouldn't have our troops there."

And so, the latest plan is to send in 20-30,000 more troops from an already way over-stretched armed force. This is a plan that his top generals (to whom he always listens, of course) have told him a) won't work and b) beyond not working may well make things worse. In U.S. Iraq Commanding General Casey's (paraphrased) words, words, it would make things appear even more like an occupation. That despite the military advice, Bush is still pushing ahead is indicative of what his real goals, to which I have previously spoken, are.

(While his plan is on the surface being adhered to by the top commanders, the same AP article cited above also noted that: "The shift in policy is likely to be accompanied by a shuffle of top American generals in Iraq. Army Gen. John P. Abizaid, commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East, has submitted plans to go ahead with a retirement that is months overdue. And the top U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. George Casey, has indicated he may not stay much longer than the end of this year. Abizaid and Casey have opposed sending more troops to Iraq, and their departures could make it easier for Bush to send more soldiers to the war.")

It is becoming clearer every day that the BushCheney plan for Iraq is for Permanent War, with permanent killing of U.S. servicepople and, in much larger numbers, Iraqis, military and civilian alike. Let us hope that once retired, either Gen. Abizaid or Gen. Casey or both, will remember that one of the primary responsibilities of generals, a lesson emphasized for them at West Point. That is not to go on taking casualties when it is clear that the military element of the war is lost. If they do, let us hope that they will speak out against the BushCheney policy, just as Colin Powell has (finally) done. But whether or not they do, the anti-war political leadership in both parties will have to address this question above all others, better sooner than later.

DR. J'S SHORT SHOT

Steven Jonas, MD, MPH is a Professor of Preventive Medicine at Stony Brook University (NY) a weekly Contributing Author for The Political Junkies (www.thepoliticaljunkies.net), Contributing Editor for The Moving Planet Blog (http://www.planetarymovement.org/), and a Columnist for BuzzFlash (http://www.buzzflash.com/).

Bookmark/Search this post with:

buzzflash | delicious | digg | yahoo | technorati