Iraq: More Proof that the Baker-Hamilton Commission Was Right and the Bush-McCain Surge Was Wrong

The surge is playing out exactly as the Baker-Hamilton Commission said it would. The "progess" in Iraq is ephemeral, if not cosmetic. As the Commission, also known as the Iraq Study Group, warned us:

"Sustained increases in U.S. troop levels would not solve the fundamental cause of violence in Iraq, which is the absence of national reconciliation. A senior American general told us that adding U.S. troops might temporarily help limit violence in a highly localized area. However, past experience indicates that the violence would simply rekindle as soon as U.S. forces are moved to another area. As another American general told us, if the Iraqi government does not make political progress, 'all the troops in the world will not provide security.' Meanwhile, America's military capacity is stretched thin: we do not have the troops or equipment to make a substantial, sustained increase in our troop presence. Increased deployments to Iraq would also necessarily hamper our ability to provide adequate resources for our efforts in Afghanistan or respond to crises around the world."

McCain, who rejected the recommendations of the the Iraq Study Group in favor of Bush's surge, continues to conflate the different warring factions into a single "enemy" acting on behalf of Iran. As his mouthpiece, Lindsay Graham, said yesterday on Fox News,

"I applaud the Maliki government for taking on Iranian-backed militia... The Iranians are killing Americans. They've aligned themselves with the Shia Mahdi army. The Badr Brigade is not the problem."

The Badr Brigade dominates Iraqi security forces so, in Graham's oversimplified view of things, the Badr Brigade is acting on behalf of the government, backed up by U.S. forces, so the Badr Brigade is not the problem.

And again, the Iraq Study Group offered a reality check which McCain and the mainstream media chose to ignore:

"The Badr Brigade is affiliated with the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), which is led by Abdul Aziz al-Hakim. The Badr Brigade has long-standing ties with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. Many Badr members have become integrated into the Iraqi police, and others play policing roles in southern Iraqi cities. While wearing the uniform of the security services, Badr fighters have targeted Sunni Arab civilians. Badr fighters have also clashed with the Mahdi Army, particularly in southern Iraq."

What lessons have Graham, McCain, Graham, Bush and all the other neocon apologists learned after five years in Iraq? Almost none.

Comments

[iratior]

Well I know it seems as though the Bush policy on Iraq is just plain stupid. But actually there''s a pattern to it. The idea now is to use American military power to enable al-Maliki to become a dictator. Bush and Cheney doubtless feel that's the best way to ensure that there's "order" in Iraq, and most importantly, that the supply of oil therefrom is cheap and reliable. It doesn't matter how corrupt al-Maliki's government turns out to be. It doesn't matter how much the war costs American taxpayers. It doesn't matter how many servicepeople die. It doesn't matter if the Iraqi government has anti-Sunni death squads. It doesn't even matter if the al-Maliki government cuddles up to Iran. For those who believe the administration's rhetoric about bringing democracy to Iraq --send me money and I'll give you the Brooklyn Bridge.

[LeftRight]

Yeah, but Maliki couldn't hold a candle to Saddam in holding the country together!

[AngerAndDetermination]

They want a government that is going to be

1) a right-wing cash cow, like Saudi, paying off the Nixon Republicans with oil and defense contracts; and

2) subservient and weak, to be used as a U.S. military base to menace other Middle Eastern nations.

[michaelgq]

I used to consider myself well read but now I must admit to not having a clue as to who is fighting whom anymore in Iraq. Are American troops now solely at the beck and call of the supposed Iraqi government, to be used in whatever situation they deem us necessary? If so , that flies in the face of 200 plus years of American history. In neither WWI or WWII did we allow our forces to be used by another government, much less so wantonly. This situation is going to end very badly.

[AngerAndDetermination]

No, the Iraqi government is at the beck and call of David Petraeus. It is called an "occupation."

[AsaNisMasa]

if this past week has taught us anything its that Moqtada al Sadr is one of the most powerful men in Iraq right now and that's probably not a good thing for any chance of "reconcillation"

[AngerAndDetermination]

Moqtada al Sadr wants the American forces out, so that Iraqis can have free elections, without U.S. tank columns rolling down the streets. He accurately described, 5 years ago, what the Republicans' real intentions were; and he would know: His father and uncle were both killed by the same Saddam Hussein who was propped up by the Republicans, over liberal objections, for 10 years. Moqtada al Sadr is what is commonly known as a "leader." If Arabs had invaded my country, I would be putting rounds through their heads right now. That is precisely what the Arabs are doing to the invaders of their country.

[YellerDawg]

Is there anything left unsaid about George and Dick's excellent adventure? And yet, the madness continues. How many more of our men and women must die for this insanity? Not to mention all those Iraqis we are destroying in order to save. Will it ever end?

[wolf58]

They learned that they can get a good carpet for five bucks. idiots....

[peterg76]

Has Bush ever been right about anything?

[bick]

bush lost the fight he picked. that's what losers do.

[LiberalMathProfessor]

As I wrote some months ago (and got gobs of crap about from some True Believers), whenever I want to get a laugh from my liberal and otherwise thoughtful, rational, fact-oriented, non-fanatic, and certainly non-Republican friends, I just wait for one of those comedy-ready silences, and then say with some emphasis and a feigned look of hopefulness, "Well, at least the surge is working!" This is, of course, dark humor, gallows humor, and not at all funny funny; it is irony, grave irony. We've been robbed and lied to, and now that the whole of everything has come tumbling down around us all and is evident for all to see both here and abroad, the asses still try to get away with the lie that, guess what, "the surge is working." Yeah, and the economy is strong, and we have a democracy, and race relations are fine, and our childrens do learn. Any Clinton supporters who may vote for McCain, or Obama supporters who may vote for McCain, in case their own favorite candidate doesn't become the Nominee, get help now, get some deep psychotherapy and soul therapy, and revisit your lacking education. We need not McCain under any circumstance, you follow? Oh, and I knew the surge was a lethal farce, and I knew the war was a crock from before the beginning, and I knew that Bush was a BS liar from decades ago. Just want to go on record, you know?

[philafella]

Great post. I personally think that those who currently claim they will not vote for their first choice on the democratic side will come around, and fast. It's a knee jerk reaction.

[anelder]

Ditto. But - if doesn't happen sensibly I will personally call each and every one of them the architect of our forthcoming disaster.

If they don't see that the only way out of this mess is to change, horses, directions, ideology etc then it's true that some fold really aren't entitled to vote.

If nothing else people - we must make sure that at least for the next four to eight years we prevent the possibilty of another Scalia-Thomas been appointed to the Supreme Court.

[SamThornton]

Setting aside all the pro and con arguments about Iraq, the fundamental flaw in US policy has been that it is structured to be reactive.

In other words, President Bush has made our future actions contingent on the future actions of the various groups of Iraqis, effectively putting control of our military and diplomatic policy in the hands of players like al-Malaki and Sadr.

The same approach seems to be encountering similar failures in such different areas as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, climate-change policy, and economic policy.

It almost appears as if President Bush and his advisers don't really understand how to set an agenda in the big arenas, and have fallen back on the strategy of letting outside events control them.

[S1m0n]

Someone needs to tell McCain that there are iranian-backed militias on both sides.

[LeftRight]

Actually who we've been fighting the last week is NOT Iranian backed, which means that we've been fighting FOR the Iranian backed militia, AGAINST the nationalist Mahdi army, which is NOT backed by Iran!

[grendl]

This is McCain's Achilles heel. Attack him on what he considers to be the strongest leg of his platform, the war in Iraq. ( Did he actually say he didn't know much about economics?)

It's what the GOP spin doctors will try to deflect this nation's attention from. The fact that he's a warhawk who didn't extract the lesson from Viet Nam that the rest of this country did. Democracy must come from within the hearts and minds of an indigenous population, not rammed down their throats with artillery. Iraq wasn't ready for democracy. They're still a tribal, sectarian nation with loyalties beholden not to tenets like the universal equality of man ( and certainly not women ) but to clerics, and religious sects. Because that's who protected their interests under Saddam's tyrannical rule.

You think they're going to relinquish those loyalties? McCain does. But if not he thinks we can force them to. Or facillitate the process, or wait them out for the next hundred years, putting at risk thousands of more American lives. They don't adhere to the singular most important tenet upon which this nation was founded Mr. McCain. Sunnis don't believe Shiites are their equals. Or Kurds. And vice versa. No amount of weaponry is going to change their minds.

Of course the bickering amongst the donkeys is more important now, so continue...

[PiratePrentiss]

Suprise-Bush was wrong again about Iraq. Why are people so willing to give these clowns 100 years? Our kids are dying for a mistake, and as long as no one admits it We WIN and the TERRORISTS lose, right war supporters?--the appeal of this type of logic to Red Staters is what's kept this going for five years

[LeftRight]

I'm not willing to give them 100 years! Hell, at this point I'm not willing to give them 100 DAYS, but they will take it anyway! THAT'S why I say no matter who the nominee is, we need to vote for them, to eliminate McBush!

[LeftRight]

Is anybody other than bushco(tm) really surprised by this?