|
Once we hit mid-summer, the strategy for supplying additional Friedman Units to the Iraq catastrophe took on two distinctive forms:
1) The surge is working, so another Friedman Unit will allow it to work 2) The surge is working, but the Iraqi Government is failing
The logical next step, then, is the replacement of the Iraqi government. This is what is going on now, and if you think it's gonna end the war, you're delusional. The drumbeat coming from the Very Serious People, including Great Seer Friedman himself, goes like this: If Malaki - an ineffectual leader - is replaced by somebody more forceful, then the two components of American Victory (tm) will be in place: military victory on the ground, and political victory in the formation of a stable government. THEREFORE, Malaki must go, and we must have another 6-12 months of war in order to allow the new government to take shape. Because, you know, you couldn't possibly pull out just when we - er, the Iraqi people - have established a new government, could you? This new line of reasoning explains the seemingly war-opposing anti-Malaki narratives that have emerged in the last few weeks, including among the Democrats (can anyone say hook, line, and sinker?). When Friedman publishes a gloomy assessment of the situation in the New York Times, you should not be fooled. He is merely angling for another Friedman Unit, and this one, dear God, shall work! When Senator Warner inveighs against the situation, he is merely setting up an argument that will prolong the war: Malaki Out, Six-to-Twelve months more, sir.
|