Surging Into Next Year and Beyond
Those of us who know anything about military history have known all along that the idea of a "surge" in Iraq is just a study in ridiculous wordplay. What Bush instituted this spring is an escalation, not a temporary influx of troops. Anyone looking for proof need look no further than Gen. Petraeus, who has just acknowledged that his promised report on the surge's effectiveness will not contain "anything definitive," meaning current troop levels will remain high into at least 2008.
I guess one could argue the definition of a "temporary surge" but I am pretty sure the 35,000 troops who were notified that they're being deployed this fall would have something to say on that note.
Advertisement
Comments
So not only is the surge not a temporary surge - it's an escalation - but it's not producing the results the administration told the American people it would. Violence is only increasing in Baghdad. And more troops are dying. That's called supporting the troops?
Oh yeah, where's the progress on the political front in Iraq the surge was supposed to allow?
Posted by: Mike Visser | May 17, 2007 11:41 AM
It's not a surge or an escalation - it a Freedom Deployment (TM).
Posted by: Jude | May 17, 2007 1:12 PM