Try My Plan Instead - It's Called "GTFO"

As long as Fred Kagan talked about alphabetized plans for “the surge” yesterday in the New York Times (discussing his Plan A, then brushing off Plan B a la Condi here – Repugs and their acolytes are always on the same page with “the message” in good times and bad, though I can never recall when times were good), I’d like to introduce my own for our people (the expurgated long term would be Get The Frack Out).

Kagan starts off by shooting himself in the foot, as it were, in typically arrogant Bushco fashion…

In fact, the debate shows only how little the critics of the war understand about military operations. As one of the initial proponents of the surge, I argue that there is no Plan B because there cannot be one. The idea that there can be a single alternative strategy, developed now, just at the beginning of the surge, is antithetical to the dynamic nature of war. At this early stage, there are only possible general responses to various contingencies, which will become more focused as operations move forward.

Yes, you unbelieving, non Bushco-supporting ingrates, I know what’s best to achieve victory as opposed to you poor saps. And you ask us to actually think ahead and plan for contingencies? What, are you part of “old Europe” or something?

What a shame that Kagan wasn’t as precise here about his 18-24 month timeframe (dating back to last December) as he was here.

Here is the only factual information I was able to discern from this utterly transparent propaganda in the Times yesterday – the rest was all vague, indefinite, suppositional claptrap…

- Saudi Arabia has agreed to forgive 80 percent of its loans to Iraq
- The two dozen or so major tribal leaders in Anbar province have joined the new Anbar Salvation Council, which is committed to fighting Al Qaeda and other foreign terrorists
- After driving al Qaeda forces from Anbar province, their forces moved to Diyala Province, and our forces, under Generals David Petraeus and Ray Odierno, followed.
- Gen. Petraeus wrote a letter to Moktada al-Sadr, head of the Shi’ite insurgency, when al-Sadr’s forces demonstrated against “the surge” last month. According to Kagan, Petraeus reminded the Iraqis that such demonstrations would not have been allowed under Saddam Hussein, and for that reason, the demonstrations were peaceful.

But wait a minute – concerning the letter to al-Sadr, didn’t Kagan also say that he had “apparently” fled to Iraq? Kagan also stated that “700 key leaders” and allies of al-Sadr’s Mahdi army have been killed or captured by our forces. So, al-Sadr is going to support us now even though he apparently isn’t even in the country any more? And why on earth would anyone believe, even if that were true, that his forces would no longer oppose us?

Are al-Sadr’s people going to help us against al Qaeda or not? Or are they just going to keep attacking Sunnis and us in the process? Or are al-Sadr’s forces collaborating with al Qaeda?

And as the Times noted today, the leading Sunni Arab party in Iraq’s prime minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki’s government is about to walk out because they don’t believe their issues will be addressed.

So the civil war will wage on and on and on.

The whole thing is an utter, stinking mess. All we should be doing now is trying to contain it.

Start getting our people out and end our involvement in this now.