It's Not the Execution
Posted by Ilan Goldenberg
The NY Times has its five year retrospective on the Iraq War and I gotta say I'm not impressed. There are nine pieces: Bremer, Perle, Slaughter, Pollack, Pletka, Fick, Eaton, Kagan, and Cordesman. I understand the need to bring in more conservatives for this piece, since they are the ones responsible for the execution. But out of the nine pieces not one talks about the strategic failure of going in in the first place.
Almost 4,000 American troops have died, approximately 30,000 have been wounded, we've appropriated more than $500 billion with the costs to the actual economy estimated to be well over $1 trillion and possibly heading towards $3 trillion. For all of this we have gotten a more powerful Al Qaeda, a more powerful Iran, a more unstable Middle East, and an overstretched military.
But all of these pieces talk about the failure of execution and foist blame at various directions as if this could have all worked out if we had just done some things differently.
Let's face it, the failure was in the initial concept and the fact that the Times feels like it needs to give both Pletka and Kagan a spot, and can't find us a Korb, Graham, or Bacevich to make the strategic failure argument is pathetic.
And for God's sake. With 9 Pieces about Iraq, perhaps the Times should have had at least one piece by ummm.... perhaps an Iraqi? But after all who cares what they think. Fred Kagan and Danielle Pletka tell it like it is.
On the bright side. No Mike O'Hanlon.