Given that we, in the political world, have been waiting for this week’s discussion on conditions in Iraq for months, it seems like this would be a good time for some broad, over-arching post about the entire dynamic — the troops, the White House, Gen. Petraeus, Amb. Crocker, congressional Dems, congressional Republicans, the media, everyone.
But really, what more needs to be said? We know, for example, when Petraeus and Crocker testify today and tomorrow, they’re going to argue that there’s been progress in Iraq. There hasn’t. They’re going to insist that the policy is working. It isn’t. They’re going to suggest that more time will produce better results. It won’t.
There’s been marginal security success in some parts of Iraq, some of which has nothing to do with the surge (as in Anbar province), and some of which has to do with the success of ethnic cleansing (around Baghdad). Political progress — the point of the surge policy — is non-existent, and in fact, has gone backwards. War supporters believe it’s wise to reward failure with more blood, more treasure, and more time.
In terms of the big picture, I suppose there’s no reason to rehash every post about Iraq from the last several weeks. That said, given the context and climate, a big-picture analysis is certainly in order. The National Security Network has released a terrific video this morning called, “Crisis in Confidence: The Politics and Policy of the Petraeus Report.” I hope folks will take a few minutes to watch it.
It’s very well done, and covers quite a bit of ground in a short period of time, but perhaps most importantly, I’d draw attention to the fact that everyone featured in the video is considered “serious” by establishment standards. There isn’t a dirty hippie in the bunch.
Rand Beers, for example, is hard to dismiss as a partisan on national security issues. He’s worked for Reagan, Clinton, and both Bushes, most recently as a special assistant to the president for combating terrorism at the National Security Council for Bush 43. (On Reagan’s NSC staff, he had replaced Oliver North as director for counterterrorism and counternarcotics.) And in the NSN clip, he explains why the Petraeus/Crocker testimony should not be accepted as authoritative.
For that matter, Richard Clarke has worked for every president since Reagan and served as Bush 43’s top anti-terrorism advisor at the NSC. And he believes, strongly, that the Bush administration is making a horrible mistake.
I mention this because the establishment, both in the media and in DC, finds it easy to dismiss the concerns of MoveOn, Michael Moore, progressive blogs, the majority of Americans, etc. But this clip includes people who command respect, even at DC cocktail parties.
Today the National Security Network released a new video “Crisis in Confidence: The Politics and Policy of the Petraeus Report” in which frank assessments of the Bush Administration’s flawed Iraq strategy are offered by leading experts such as Richard Clarke, Jon Alterman, and Mara Rudman.
The six minute film features assessments from experts who’ve spent their careers analyzing the Middle East, sharing their outrage over the decisions that have put American lives at risk, and today’s report by General Petraeus to Congress. […]
In addition to Cabrera, Clarke, Rudman, and Beers, the film also features Roger Cressey, former counterterrorism advisor in the Bush White House, Ilan Goldenberg, policy director of the National Security Network, and Jon Alterman, director of the Middle East Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
“Serious” professionals, one and all.
And as long as we’re on the subject, Media Matters has put together an impressive item called, “Myths and falsehoods about progress in Iraq.” You’ll find the most common conservative claims about conditions in Iraq, and the evidence to the contrary. It’s worth holding onto this week; we’ll be hearing quite a bit of nonsense that’ll need debunking.