Friday, February 27, 2009

Come Again . . . ?

What? What did you say? Along with Rachel Maddow, I have to wonder how leaving 50,000 so-called residual forces in Iraq after the official withdrawal of troops is "ending the war." Obama's already briefed key members of Congress, and he's going to tell the rest of us about it later today. Powerful voices like speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's have already been heard in opposition. My prediction: nobody is going to fight Obama on this; he'll get what he wants. But people who know about Pentagon deviousness (remember my previous report on this?) and who crave peace--people like me--are going to raise hell. I've already started.

US troops conduct a foot patrol along the Tigris river south of Baghdad, Iraq.

Guess who thinks the 50,000 troops staying in Iraq is just fine? Right! The frigging 4-star generals running the war in Iraq. "General David Petraeus, head of US Central Command, and General Ray Odierno, the top commander in Baghdad, believed the plan presented moderate risk but supported the 50,000 figure." Moderate risk? Risk to what? Risk to not keeping more troops there longer, which all the Pentagon wants to do. The Pentagon loves war. Hasn't anybody figured this out yet? Just wait. They'll be calling for more troops in Afghanistan even after we ratchet up the 30,000 there now with 30,000 more. So let's see. That's 50,000 in Iraq and 60,000 in Afghanistan . . . with no set reduction, only possibility of augmentation, on the horizon. Not what I voted for.

2 comments:

Montag said...

We won't see what we want until after mid-terms, or maybe the second term.
Maybe never.
I'll wait for the first two, not the third.

Unknown said...

I surely hope you're right about it being only a couple of years out. But, if our previous track record is any indication, never is a good, in fact the most likely, possibility.

Perpetual war for perpetual peace--was that Orwell?--is our reality.