No Post-Surge Planning

Are we even trying to stand the Iraqi army up anymore? And if we're not, when can we ever stand down?
This post was published on the now-closed HuffPost Contributor platform. Contributors control their own work and posted freely to our site. If you need to flag this entry as abusive, send us an email.

What happened to the Iraqi army? You know the one we were supposed to be training to take over. President Bush mentioned the phrase, "As the Iraqis stand up, we will stand down" at least 125 times by some counts. You don't hear that one anymore.

Are we even trying to stand the Iraqi army up anymore? And if we're not, when can we ever stand down?

So, what's our current battle plan? Let's say the surge goes swimmingly and we establish some modicum of security with our troops, who do we hand over the job to after that?

John McCain said there was no Plan B last week if the surge doesn't work. But there doesn't seem to be a Plan A if it does work.

Don Rumsfeld threatened to fire anyone who did post-war planning before the Iraq invasion (that blows my mind every time I think about it). Now, we have a situation where no one has done any post-surge planning.

There is no plan for what to do if the surge doesn't work and there doesn't seem to be a plan for what to do if the surge does work. If we're not training the Iraqi army anymore, how can we ever leave?

And what happened to all those Iraqi battalions that Rumsfeld and Bush were telling us were trained up already? Was it all a lie or was all the so-called training useless because they couldn't keep anyone loyal to the Iraqi army? It was almost certainly both, but the latter is more damning.

The situation reminds you of Oscar Wilde's timeless quote, "In this world there are only two tragedies. One is not getting what one wants, and the other is getting it." So, what happens if we get the surge we want? How do we leave? Do we have to start training the new Iraqi army after the surge? How long will that take? Has anyone planned this out?

General Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has said the US is trying to buy "time for the Iraqi government to provide the good governance and the economic activity that is required." How is that for hideously vague? We're waiting for good governance in Iraq? God help us all.

And even if we were to magically have good governance and a swell economy in Iraq, then what? Has anyone thought this through?

Apparently someone at the State Department has. An anonymous source told McClatchy Newspapers, "Our strategy now is to basically hold on and wait for the Iraqis to do something."

Well, there you have it then. We're waiting for "something" in Iraq. I bet we get it. And I bet it isn't pretty. But do we even know what it is? And what we would do with it if we got it?

Popular in the Community

Close

What's Hot