ConservativeINC

Steve Schippert from NRO’s The Tank wrote this great piece asking some obvious questions and making some obvious points about Iraq.

Yesterday morning, you likely had to look hard to find coverage of LTG Odierno reporting Iraq violence is at its lowest since the February 2006 al-Qaeda bombing of the al-Askaria shrine in Samarra.. (New Zealand media was actually the first to report it.)

But what didn’t require much effort to find were stories on New Mexico governor and presidential hopeful Bill Richardson blaming American troops carrying out an “American policy of hostility” for the level of violence in Iraq. It is unclear if Richardson knows or believes that the violence levels there have decreased dramatically. Perhaps this requires yet another “suspension of disbelief.”

“We are being bled dry by an invasion that is costing us $500 billion so far — $500 billion,” he said, stressing the cost. “And it’s detracting from American security objectives in dealing with terrorism, with nuclear proliferation, with energy independence.”

In an hourlong interview with AP editors and reporters, the New Mexico governor argued that all combat and non-combat troops should be removed from Iraq because their presence is only contributing to violence instead of bringing security.

“There’s no question there’s tribal and ethnic hatreds,” Richardson told The Associated Press. “But when those tribal and ethnic hatreds are fueled by American policy of hostility, then you make the situation worse.”

On the contrary, the forward-leaning surge (aka the “American policy of hostility”) has reduced violence dramatically (50% drop in attacks in Baghdad since January alone). And where the surge has been the most aggressive — al-Qaeda’s Diyala province lair north of Baghdad — 80% of the major tribes have signed agreements to fight with Iraqi and US forces against al-Qaeda.

How can our own political leaders blast our actions as a “policy of hostility” when that is clearly the manner in which al-Qaeda operates? We are not baking young boys and serving them as lunch to their families to gain such cooperation through community-wide intimidation. We are not executing local tribal leaders and terrorizing entire towns into submission. Instead, we are fighting with Iraqis against those who are, freeing them of the yoke of al-Qaeda’s violent intimidation.

Someone — preferably Governor Richardson — just answer this one simple question I have:

Why is fighting al-Qaeda in Iraq not counterterrorism but fighting al-Qaeda anywhere else is? How under God’s blue sky is pounding bin Laden’s deployed minions in Anbar, Diyala, Baghdad, and elsewhere “detracting from American security objectives in dealing with terrorism”?

The illogic in such statements is simply mind-boggling — regardless of what one thinks of the decision to invade Iraq or the handling of the war since then.

I’m sure to be branded as partisan for taking such things to task. I am absolutely partisan: partisan toward victory, not a political party. I am not the one who drew the line between supporting victory and begging defeat straight down the center aisle of both houses of the US Congress.

Now, can Governor Richardson please answer my question?

Source: tank.nationalreview.com

Well said Mr. Schippert. BigT

Tell Your Friends! Bookmark Me!



Take Me To Your Homepage!