What's That Sound? Why It's the Further Lowering of the Bar on Iraq

In Sunday's New York Times U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker was quoted as saying Iraq is "going to be a long, hard slog."

Sound familiar?

It should, because here was then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld -- four years and one month ago:

"It will be a long, hard slog."

This thing has been going on for so long, the administration is reusing excuses. But hey, at least the administration can now claim it's no longer hostile to recycling, right?

Even more staggering was the rest of the Times piece, which was part of the administration's quarterly Lowering Of Expectations. It's like clockwork: if there's a piece in the Times quoting unnamed "leaders" in "both capitals" who "continue to hold out hope", an "elated" White House, and mention of "positive signs" all around, you know the seasons have just changed. It's sort of like the solstice, only profoundly depressing.

What else did we learn this time out? That "with American military successes outpacing political gains in Iraq, the Bush administration has lowered its expectation of quickly achieving major steps toward unifying the country..."

Really? So we can all stop holding our breath about "quickly" unifying the country? I'd say the "quickly" ship sailed four years ago. Now it's no longer about quick or not-so-quick, it's about ever or never, as in: will we ever leave Iraq?

But the purpose of the surge was not more "military success" but political stability. As Matt Yglesias notes:

"...its goal was to create an improvement in the security situation in Baghdad which (it was hypothesized) was the necessary precondition for a political resolution to Iraq's fundamental conflicts. The surge was tried, and American casualties went up and violence stayed at the same level and then violence declined and then US casualties decline and then it turned out that the surge had failed and the political situation was the same as it had been at the beginning."

So what's the goal now? Instead of actual political progress the new goal is... convincing everyone political progress is being made.

I am not making this up.

Here's how the Times describes it:

"Instead, administration officials say they are focusing their immediate efforts on several more limited but achievable goals in the hope of convincing Iraqis, foreign governments and Americans that progress is being made toward the political breakthroughs that the military campaign of the past 10 months was supposed to promote."

How much lower can the bar get? Though, on the upside, maybe the Bush administration will strike oil as it digs lower and lower to move the bar.

Now the surge was apparently implemented so "American officials" could focus on "pragmatic goals like helping the Iraqi government spend the money in its budget."

That's right: our new definition of success in Iraq is helping the Iraqi government spend money.

So as you see the administration and the GOP presidential candidates give high fives to each other and declare "mission accomplished" this week because only 30-50 American soldiers are being killed every month, it's worth remembering (because the media have apparently already forgotten) that the purpose of the surge was never military. Opponents of the surge were not skeptical that it would pay military dividends. They were skeptical that the surge would magically translate into political success.

But, of course, war supporters are off the hook, because every four years one of them comes out to tell the American people that Iraq is going to be "a long, hard slog."

So who is it going to be in November of 2011?

Guesses anybody?

Comments

[mikeeforthetruth]

This Administration the R"s (and I don"t mean Republicans) are trying to destroy our (human) way of life

I seem to be living in a nation that simply does not know what freedom is.
John Whiteside Parsons

MWiz of - truthseekerforum.com

[jeffinrr]

Sorry Arianna. The HuffPo is one of my favorite web destinations and I agree with you on many things. But this ain't one of them.

You hypothesis people are moving to agnosticism and atheism mostly as a reaction to fundamentalism just doesn"t hold water. I, and many people I know, have moved to agnosticism/atheism after carefully considering the possibility of God"s existence. And when examined with scrutiny, the existence of God, like Santa Claus, seems pretty unlikely.

As far as becoming empty and fear-filled, this has not been my experience. I have the good fortune to have some wonderful relationships with friends and family. I"m able to be a part of an organization that is doing some incredible things to address world hunger and poverty. My life is far from being devoid of meaning or full of fear. I see awe and wonder in what life has become, and yet I"m not polyannaish about the challenges the world faces. Still, I feel incredibly fortunate to be part of the journey.

[air2air]

Here is Bill Clinton's excellent address outlining the reasons he attacked Saddam's Iraq:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENAV_UoIfgc

[NoFactsJustTruth]

Previously accidently posted to the "Fear of Faith" blog posting by Arianna. It was meant for here.


I think some journalists in Iraq are venturing further out into Baghdad the last month or so, Arianna, with the likely bribed reductions in violence holding for awhile. I saw an expose this week from the streets that had interviews with local sunni men that say when the USA leaves Iraq then they will ALL fight against their Government.

The sunni men there DO NOT BELIEVE in the politically unified Iraq that WE're told MUST be achieved, the same unified Iraq NO PROGRESS has been made on during 'the surge'. Once enough political solidarity occurs to get the oil laws signed, how much will OUR Government care then what happens to the level of violence and solidarity within Iraq?

It seems they've turned Iraq into the old West...with humvees, not horses. Is the idea that oil companies are allowed to throw a few billion at mercenaries every year to keep the Iraq population subjegated in OUR country's name,...so they can pump oil and natural gas for profit$?

And, does NO combat troops equate to NO USA Soldiers there?

It seems OUR country's people are being played again, Arianna, and I am dismayed at the number of them that still think ANY part of this crime is worth a single 'one' of OUR soldier's lives or limbs.

[scaramouche]

Of course you are right. Of course the bar is lowered - and will continue to be because the whole idea ( one of the administration's list of why we are there in Iraq ) is an idea built on a premise of sand. The idea of a unified political entity comprised of those various factions is wishful thinking. It is an exercise in self -delusion that will never be. No matter how far the bar is lowered, we failed. Time to come home - and perhaps apologize for the damage this hapless administration has caused.

[leftLibertarian]

MS. Huffington:

Wake up your fellow Democrats, esp the ones in Congress. It's not to late to impeach the criminals Bush and Cheney!

Less government, more liberty, happy new year!

[Charles TW]

We keep forgetting that our stated objectives for invading Iraq were punitive: to punish Iraq for its role in 9/11, to punish Iraq for its support of terrorism, to punish Iraq for attempting to acquire and build wmd's. Then once it was established that Iraq was innocent on all counts, Bush announced his objectives were to: rid Iraq of Saddam,establish a democracy, and, since we were there, control Iraq's oil supply. Now that we've ridded Iraq of Saddam, and Iraq has rejected democracy on our terms, and we've at least, through Hunt Oil, got a foot in the door in controlling the oil supply in the Kurdish region, now Bush and his cohorts must continue to offer phantom objectives, such as driving Al Qaeda out of Iraq, to mask their true objective of re-establishing Western domination in the entire Middle East.

The entire operation seemed like a piece of cake at the outset. Lop off the head (Saddam) and the body dies. After the loss of over three thousand American soldiers' lives, about a quarter of million Iraqi lives, and the expenditure of a trillion dollars of American treasure, that piece of cake has turned into a national nightmare, and the body has grown more heads than we could have possibly anticipated.

No one ever defined "victory" to the American people or what success in Iraq truly entailed. As with Korea and Vietnam, we sent some of our best young men and women off to war on the assumption that victory would define itself as we went along.

The surge is successful for no other reason than because the label "success" was just lying around without anything else to affix it to.

www.charlestwilliams.com

[Aragorn]

Let's see. Over $120 billion a year pouring into Iraq. How much goes into Maliki's pocket???? Plenty!!!! Not much incentive to see the US leave. Just keep the promises coming and the money will keep coming as well. Where do you think this tactic was learned???
These are just uncommon theives. It's all about the money.

[Driver125]

"That's right: our new definition of success in Iraq is helping the Iraqi government spend money"

Alllllllllright!!!!! Finally something we are good at.

[speedtheplow]

"Get thee glass eyes, and like a scurvy politician seem to see the things thou dost not."

"Foul deeds will rise, though all the earth o'erwhelm them from men's eyes."

[LiberalMathProfessor]

This war was started for three obvious reasons: To secure the 2004 elections for BushCheney & Co., to obtain oil at cost, and to advance the economic/military empire. The war is mass murder/suicide during and following an armed robbery, and we should identify, indict and prosecute the perps. When was the last time that we tried to make the best of a mass murderer's enterprises? Get of Iraq today, and indict the Americans who started and are continuing this unholy crime. And while we're at it, America wake up and start smelling the rot; stop falling for every next tag line, slogan and hynotic suggestion that keeps you in line while keeping us in Iraq (and verging on Iran). George McGovern, some months ago in Harper's, gave a simple and realistic method for leaving Iraq AND cleaning up the awful mess we've made, and for a mere, one-time-only expense of a few billion dollars; read that as your way out.

[janvoght]

arianna, just really want to share with you, that you always emerge as the voice of reason and balance, centeredness and integrity. i have listened to your contributions recently regarding the weather on the political scene on msnbc, on the early morning show with joe, mika, and willy, and others that always impress as knowlegable, intelligent thoughful and "spot on" as they say.
i was really expecting the latest "coincidental," timely ploy of the administration, to find sudden peace in this region, that for 100's of years have not lived in harmony. why did they not arrive at this recent bushel of events earlier, when our troops could have benefitted? just in time for the 2008 elections is what conclusion i keep arriving at. anyway, i so appreciated your comment regarding rove, and his attempt to rewrite history, and thanks for keith oberman for posing this situational question to you, who as always gave the reasonable surefooted response that the rest of the american public is once again probably going to snooze thru! our lives are so good here in this country that we are not paying attention, and we are so vulnerable this way...how can we educate the public to keep them awake and paying the necessary attention?

thanks again!

[rjberner]

Our pandemic political numbness is beyond embarrassing now. This crap we are fed without shame is now largely ignored by a populace that our "leaders" know are far more concerned with the latest flat-screen TV or the newest text-messaging, internet-ready cell phone than anything else. I suggest we all:

1).See again the movie Matrix (I) and ponder if the Matrix is really here, now.
2).As has been suggested, focus on electing new representatives that are not sponsored by the Corporate Matrix (if they exist). If they walk, talk, fart and breathe, they will be more than qualified.
3).Consume as much oil and oil-based crap as you possibly can so that it's gone as soon as possible.

[Ring0]

With 14 new permanent bases being built I doubt seriously that "leaving" was ever the plan.
I don't see any candidate that really is offering anything different other then Ron Paul, Mike Gravel or Dennis Kucinich. It's business as usual in Washington and sounds like some of you are falling for the same ol'e Sh*t. I remember reading Einstein's definition of insanity: "Doing the same things over and over and expecting a different result". Evidently, our best thinking (voting) has got us in this mess were in today. I for one will not make the same mistake I have in the past. I will not vote for anyone preaching the S.O.S., trying to fear me into more killing or blaming the other party. It's no longer a party issue when people like Hillary endorse the war. Change what you are thinking and you will really change the country.

[darker]

Americans still "don't get it" because they've been brainwashed into incredulity by republican-controlled media.

The Texas white trash Asses of Evil in the White House plan a huge reunion for their "last laugh" with their Saudi pals in Dubai at Halliburton's new headquarters.

They will be toasting with crude oil their "mission accomplished": the emptying of the USTreasury and the pockets of middle-Americans.