I was shocked, shocked! to read this in today's Boston Globe a scant week after General Patraeus and President Bush declared so much success:
WASHINGTON - Despite his conclusion that Iraqi units can replace US combat troops who will return home by the end of the year, statistics produced by General David Petraeus, the top American commander in Iraq, indicate that there are now fewer Iraqi units that can operate independently than there were at the beginning of the year.
Question one: Was Patraeus' report to Congress, and the announced troop drawdown, even more theater than anyone realized?
Question two - and I'm sure this occurred to those paying attention to events of last week - why didn't Patraeus get asked about this?
Though the general was on Capitol Hill as part of two days of intense, high-profile hearings on the progress of the war, the readiness of Iraqi troops received scant attention from Petraeus or lawmakers.
There's more...
Back to question one, re last week's theatrics, the General and the Decider have apparently pulled the wool over everyone's eyes. Look for more of this in a theatre near you:
"It isn't that we have been building an Iraqi Army for four years," said Feisal al-Istrabadi, who recently served as Iraq's deputy representative to the United Nations. "We have barely been at the job for two years. You cannot instill from the ground up in six months an esprit de corps."
He remains hopeful that the Iraqi security forces will develop in time for the new strategy, but warned of a "huge danger" of handing them responsibility too soon.
"If you have a premature [US] withdrawal, you drive the country into complete and utter chaos," said Istrabadi, who now teaches at Indiana University. "The risk is absolute blood and chaos."
Guess that return on success will have to wait a bit:
Fred Kagan, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute who was also an early proponent of the surge, said that the Petraeus-Bush plan could backfire.
"I think it is possible to reduce forces without jeopardizing our success, but I think we have to acknowledge that it is increasing our risks against the possibility of unforeseen developments," Kagan said.
But Keane said Petraeus and his commanders have assured him that there is a backup plan: stop bringing troops home if the violence increases.
I do believe this "administration" is duplicitous enough to have staged this entire episode. What do you think?