What It Means to Support the Troops
American soldiers on patrol in Baghdad, Iraq, on Jan.29, 2007
(2 of 2)
And my response is that politicians have sacred missions too. Their duty is threefold: to be judicious about sending the troops off to war, to give the military everything it needs to complete the mission and, if it appears the mission is futile or compromised, to change it or end it. "You have to ask who is really undermining this mission?" says Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island, a West Point graduate. "Didn't the Bush Administration undermine it from the start by going to war without sufficient cause, without sufficient planning, without sufficient equipment for our troops? Even now, I would argue that the Bush Administration is undermining this surge by focusing merely on the military part of the mission, ignoring the need to reform the Iraqi government, to find a regional diplomatic solution and, of course, ignoring the real facts on the ground."
The facts on the ground are dismal. The near impossibility of the mission is already apparent. The Iraqis promised three additional brigades to help secure Baghdad, but military sources tell me that two of those brigades are Kurdish, and there is a question how many will actually show up. Even if they do arrive in numbers, Kurds a) don't speak Arabic and b) don't like Arabs very much, which may, well, undermine the mission. There was a coordinated series of seven bombs detonated in the northern city of Kirkuk last week, which may be a sign that the long-feared battle between Kurds and Arabs for control of that oil-rich region is about to begin. That makes it doubly unlikely that the Kurdish brigades will deploy to Baghdad. Furthermore, whack-a-mole happens: there are indications the Shi'ite militias are going to ground or leaving Baghdad to fight elsewhere, perhaps in places like Kirkuk, which means, Senator Reed says, "we'll be doing their job for them, fighting the Sunnis in Baghdad."
"We're on the brink of a decisive battle for Baghdad," Lieberman said on the Senate floor. But that was wrong too: the counterinsurgency tactics General Petraeus will use are gradual, not "decisive" in the traditional military sense. We are not on the brink of anything except a long hard slog. I suspect Lieberman understands this but is hyping the mission for dramatic effect. If so, he is raising unfair expectations for the troops and the nation. I'd say that comes pretty damn close to undermining the mission.
On TIME Mobile, now you can read Joe Klein's column every week free on the Web browser of your cell phone or mobile device. Go to mobile.time.com
- « PREV PAGE
- 1
- 2
Most Popular »
- Top 10 Celebrity Restaurants
- Who Qualifies for the $26 Billion Foreclosure Settlement?
- Facing the Challenge of China, Should India Embrace the U.S.?
- The Art of Nazi Hunting: How Israel's Mossad Found Adolf Eichmann
- Why Is Your Boss Moving to Brazil?
- Jimmy Stewart: A Hero Home From the War
- FBI File on Steve Jobs Probed Apple Founder's Drug Use, Character
- TIME's Interview With Italian Prime Minister Mario Monti
- Oscars 2012: Great Performances
- Why Mario Monti Is the Most Important Man in Europe
- The Upside Of Being An Introvert (And Why Extroverts Are Overrated)
- Why Is Your Boss Moving to Brazil?
- Why Mario Monti Is the Most Important Man in Europe
- Lessons Unlearned: Why Another Gigantic Famine Looms in Africa
- Can Israel Stop Iran's Nuke Effort?
- No More Tears
- Seoul Searching
- Warren Buffett Is on a Radical Track
- Children of the New India: How Economic Reforms Impacted Upon the Young
- Scientists: NASA to Cut Missions to Mars




