While being a POW sucks, it doesn't make you any more an expert in military strategy than undergoing chemotherapy makes you an oncologist. I mean, seriously, we added troops and the violence went down? That's like you're hungry, you eat a cheeseburger, and you're suddenly not hungry. Genius.
Also, an increase in troops is hardly the only reason for the decrease in violence. And for that I'm going to need another analogy from my bag of...um, analogies. Allow me to present the greatest movie in the short-lived career of actor Chris Makepeace. That's right, I'm talking about "My Bodyguard."
Matt Dillon is the bully who wants Chris Makepeace to pay him protection money in order to protect him from... Matt Dillon. We are Chris Makepeace in this analogy (get it? Make Peace?). Matt Dillon is the "Sunni Insurgency." And what happened when Chris Makepeace decided to stop paying Matt Dillon? Matt Dillon kicked his ass. Chris Makepeace then had to hire Adam Baldwin, Matt Dillon then hired some other guy... and...well, that's where my analogy ends. Point is, you can only pay for so long. Eventually, you're gonna have to stop paying. And then what?
And let's not forget about the Sunni Awakening, a classic case of Sun Tzu's "The Enemy of My Enemy Is My Friend." Basically, tribal leaders in Anbar realized that there are people they hate more than us. This is what Obama has been saying all along - make the Iraqis realize that if they don't start defending their own country they're going to lose it to the real assholes.
The Surge is a myth. It didn't work by a stroke of genius and it didn't work by itself. It's a cheeseburger. And along with fries and a coke (and Our Bodyguard) it did the job for now. (Note to reader: please spare me the comments about how callous I am. I know that human lives are not the same thing as a Happy Meal. I'm not a jackass. Usually.)
Calling John McCain an expert on military strategy because he was a pilot and a POW is about as accurate as calling Sarah Palin an expert on energy because she lives next to an oil pipeline. It's ludicrous. Not to mention, irrelevant. A president doesn't need to be a general. In fact, our forefathers designed it so that he wouldn't be. That's why we don't live in a banana republic (yet), with presidents who wear uniforms (like Saddam Hussein).
A president needs to know the difference between getting military advice and permitting the military to replace civilian leadership. A president needs to be sophisticated and thoughtful, needs to see the war in the context of the larger world, needs an understanding of law and history, and needs to possess genuine confidence based on knowledge, intelligence, and humility. Kinda like Sarah Palin.
These are not just the philosophical musings of a new...
I'm pleased to announce the launch today of two new HuffPost...
Long before $150,000-gate, Sarah Palin seemed to...
The Obamas dropped by the Vatican on Friday, with daughters...
Yesterday evening, Greg Sargent reported on The Plum Line that one of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's key reasons...
I was sorry to watch, live on CNN, Edward R. Murrow and Emmy Award-winning broadcaster and...
I never actually heard the words made famous by a certain man on a certain TV show. Instead I got a lot...
Jim Hansen is director of the NASA Goddard Institute for...
ANCHORAGE, Alaska — The former fiance of Gov. Sarah Palin's...
Hermione herself, Emma Watson, charmed David Letterman and...
Think Progress flags David Brooks telling...
While we of course do not claim to know anyone's thoughts, we nominate these...
The Daily Show's John Oliver is unhappy with mainstream journalism, and even drearier...
For this week's installment of their "Lunch with the FT" feature the...
SYDNEY — Residents of a rural Australian town hoping to protect the earth and their wallets...
Al Franken's been anointed as Minnesota's junior senator, but how did the...
"What's for dinner?" A lot of us ask that question right...
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
By supporting the surge rather than immediate withdrawal of all US troops from Iraq, McCain has directly furthered bin Laden's objectives for his 9/11 attack by contributing to our near bankruptcy and our drowning in a sea of debt and corruption. Osama bin Laden's purpose of attacking the US on 9/11 was to bring us down economically. That's what he said at the time and that's the reason the World Trade Center was attacked. It appears that John McCain, George Bush and the US Congress have given the victory to bin Laden, including the funding for the surge. While McCain gleefully point to a diminution in the violence in Iraq resulting from the surge, he can't deny the $10 billion per month cost into the indefinite future and the fact that Ahmadinejad received a hero's welcome when he visited Baghdad this summer. Now, largely because of the Iraq War and Reaganomics, the US is struggling economically, just as bin Laden wants and we won't even stop the spending on the war. Bin Laden is winning as a result of the Iraq occupation including the surge and John McCain's insistence that we continue to bankrupt ourselves in executing the anti-American occupation and the surge is giving aid and comfort to those he defines as the enemy.
Every nickel the US has misspent in conducting the Iraq War, including on the surge, has directly contributed to our near bankruptcy and our drowning in a sea of debt and corruption. Osama bin Laden's purpose of attacking the US on 9/11 was to bring us down economically. That's what he said at the time and that's the reason the World Trade Center was attacked. It appears that John McCain, George Bush and the US Congress have given the victory to bin Laden, including the funding for the surge. While McCain gleefully point to a diminution in the violence in Iraq resulting from the surge, he can't deny the $10 billion per month cost into the indefinite future and the fact that Ahmadinejad received a hero's welcome when he visited Baghdad this summer. Now, largely because of the Iraq War and Reaganomics, the US is struggling economically, just as bin Laden wants and we won't even stop the spending on the war. Bin Laden is winning as a result of the Iraq occupation including the surge and John McCain's insistence that we continue to bankrupt ourselves in executing the anti-American occupation and the surge is giving aid and comfort to those he defines as the enemy.
i want to retch each time i hear McCain (and Palin) talk about the surge and mentions this so-called "victory" we're trying to achieve there. for the life of me, i can't understand why this victory charade hasn't been challenged more by the MSM and even our own Democrats. under the premise that "we won't leave Iraq until we achieve 'Victory'", and since the terms of this "victory" have never been defined, we will then never leave Iraq for to do so would be tantamount to defeat. i still get a chuckle over how McCain blew the "tactic vs. strategy" in the first debate and how deftly Obama set him straight. McCain is no tactician; he's not even a strategist. give me the thoughtful, contemplative, steady hand of Barack Obama, backed up by the wise, proven and honorable Joe Biden. they are the ones putting our "Country First".
proud to have already voted for Obama/Biden '08...
"Calling John McCain an expert on military strategy because he was a pilot and a POW is about as accurate as calling Sarah Palin an expert on energy because she lives next to an oil pipeline. It's ludicrous."
I laugh my ass off every time she refers to her "expertise" in energy. My boss has been in the power industry for 40 years, and he's built nearly every kind of power plant there is. Does that make him qualified to be VP? Well, probably more than Palin.
But it's even funnier when she says her Foreign experience is seeing Russia from her state. ROTFLOL!!
All Palin knows about energy is that is oozes out of the ground, is black, and stinks.
Well done, Michael. I've been concerned over how some Americans whether through ignorance or laziness tend to take "talking points" and rhetoric at face value. With so much information at one's fingertips, you would think that before adopting any stance on any issue, Americans would at least do enough research to demonstrate a basic knowledge of the subject. During this campaign, we've seen the resurrection of false and debunked claims as if they've never been disproved. Is it widespread ADD? Is it abject denial? Where one candidate appeals to the higher aspects of consciousness and intelligence, the other panders to baser instincts and uncovers a facet of the American people most thought was extinct. The one positive thing in the current situation is that it has forced the majority to focus on real "bread and butter" issues at the heart of America's prosperity and growth. I only pray that we can learn not to become so easily distracted going forward.
Keep bringing stuff like this. Those who are consciously aware deeply appreciate it.
Well Said Michael! Finally someone stood up and said it like it is. The fact is - why are his files sealed? Never been examined or questioned on this issue by anyone in the Media so myth grew! .
McCain has cheapened his P.O.W. status by his own ambition and lack of humbleness to the point of it being nothing more than a political talking point.to squander such a test of honor on a presidental election is "beyond the pale"....what a waste .
In fact I would have thought that in strictly military terms, being taken prisoner would disqualify you from being considered an "expert" or a success.
That and crashing 4 or 5 planes ... let's face it the writing was on the wall as far as McCain being a success long before he got captured.
I always wonder about the surge. Supposedly the surge was a success. My understanding of the definition of success was that US troops could turn over control to the Iraqi government and army.
Since that has not yet happened...doesn't that suggest that the surge at best is not complete and at worst has not succeeded??
No, at best the surge hasn't succeeded. At worst, it played into the hands of extremists and those who wish to persecute others, creating a cesspit of anger and helplessness just asking to be filled by terrorists.
To be fair, though, the surge couldn't possibly have succeeded in the stated goals it was supposed to enable Iraq to attain. Military force cannot create real peace, real respect, discussion, political empowerment, or anything else other than fear and death. It is a tool--an effective one, in the right hands--but was so poorly used, abused, and misdirected that it accomplished nothing of value that isn't entirely fleeting and likely to blow away in the wind, whether of force increases/decreases or civilian-based changes..
That and we payed each fighter on both sides $300 a month not to fight anymore.
I am sure that I heard that the US paid insurgents not to attack US troops! Perhaps it was in the Bob Woodward interview recently...and I apologize to Mr. Woodward if I have misunderstood, but I believe I am right!
How much money is this costing us? Is the "blood money" to the tribal chiefs included in the $10 billion that this war drains from the US taxpayer every month?
Well, if we are paying them to stop the violence, no wonder "the surge is working"! Money talks.....
When will they ever tell us the truth??
McCain was a Navy jet jockey, just like Rumsfeld, who I think is a good deal smarter. Neither
knows squat about winning campaigns, compared with a competent general. They both
have big egos, however.
I've wondered how the myth of McCain's expertise came to be. Seems to me like he's gotten a pass on the claim throughout his entire political career. Based on what we know of his record he was actually a crappy pilot, and was not in any capacity to make strategic decisions in his military career.
Thank you......glad somebody is thinking the same thing I have been since they started pushing this surge thing.......
This reminds me: there's something that's been bugging me since the VP debate. At that debate, Sarah Palin stated, "John McCain knows how to win wars." Could somebody please tell me to what war was she referring. Something in my gut tells me she might have been referring to his experience in Vietnam, which... well... I just hope my gut is wrong.
Anyway, I'd just like to know what war she was talking about because I don't think we've won any wars because of John McCain and if he knows how to win this one, why has he kept mum about it for six years?
That's like when McCain says, "I know how to get Bin Laden." If he knows how, why hasn't he done so? Is this the blackmail that will make us vote for him, "vote for me and I might tell you how to get Bin Laden. " LOL.
IMHO the "surge" is just another word for "escalation of war."
"Also, an increase in troops is hardly the only reason for the decrease in violence. "
When forces on both sides are dying, eventually the violence is going to decrease.
Duh!
"Surge" (idiot term) or no, there's going to come a time when there's no one left to fight!
Excellent analogies. I've often wondered where these self professed creditials originate from, and we- as a nation- should be making these simple observations and asking some pretty simple questions to which we should get answers.
Except McCain limits his audiences to Republicans, who are not smart enought to ask quesitons.
You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in or