Dead Dogs, Dead Ponies: The Petraeus Show

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/09/11/3760/

Dead Dogs, Dead Ponies: The Petraeus Show
by Pierre Tristam

On Sept. 7 Gen. David Petraeus, commander of the Iraq operation, wrote a letter to U.S. troops detailing, in his words, “what I believe we have - and have not - accomplished” with the troop “surge” in Iraq. Petraeus wants to convey the Bush Administration’s message: The “surge” must continue because on the whole it’s working more than it’s failing. Is it? A mammoth report in the Times (the word count approximates the American death tally in Iraq) answered the question grimly enough. But so did Petraeus. The very words he used to convince Congress to go on with the “surge” prove the bankruptcy of the campaign. Here’s a point-by-point analysis of Petraeus’ claims:

“Up front, my sense is that we have achieved tactical momentum.” Petraeus is right, but the operative word is “tactical.” Are U.S. troops able to overwhelm the enemy in battle-by-battle situations? Of course. The tactical advantage of the most massive military in the world has never really been in question. It’s the strategic momentum that’s in question: Are troops winning hearts and minds? Not quite. Is stability maintained after troops withdraw from a “secured” neighborhood? No. Are U.S. military successes followed by political successes? No.

We are “a long way from the goal line but we do have the ball and we are driving down the field.” Petraeus is using a football metaphor in a soccer country. To Americans the war is about holding on to the ball, keeping up the offense, driving “down the field” one down after another. To Iraqi nationalists and the Iraqi insurgency, it’s more like soccer: Possession isn’t offense. Strategy is - waiting out the opponent, defending, even letting him exhaust himself through possession. The difference is exclusively who scores more. In Iraqi public opinion, Americans are playing the wrong game-and losing.

It’s about “Al-Qaeda, associated insurgent groups, and militia extremists.” Petraeus has his order wrong. In the Iraqi insurgency, al-Qaeda’s influence and foreign fighters come last. As The New York Times reported on Aug. 25, “The military says that 78 percent of attacks against the United States are now carried out by Shiites, not Sunni militants, who had caused the vast majority of the violence in the early years of the war.” Al-Qaeda in Iraq is itself reviled and considered an outsider even among most Sunnis. Petraeus is right: It’s about “militia extremists.” But most are Shiites, and they’re biding their time.

It’s Sunnis’ fault. It’s Shiites’ fault. It’s Saddam’s fault. Petraeus makes a curious statement: “All of this takes place in a climate of distrust and fear that stems from the sectarian violence that did so much damage to the fabric of Iraqi society in 2006 and into 2007, not to mention the decades of repression under Saddam’s brutal regime.” It’s as if the American-led invasion that did so much to destabilize the country, along with massive blunders by the Bush Administration in the early days of the war (fighting the war on the cheap with few troops and big firepower, disbanding the Iraqi military, the de-Baathification program) never happened. But those events precipitated the chaos and sectarian violence that followed. Petraeus is projecting a convenient blind spot.

snip//

Petraeus isn’t analyzing Iraq. He’s not even addressing his troops. He’s spinning the political balance in the United States at President Bush’s behest, with a report written line by line by White House schemers hopped up on Oval Office hubris and caffeine from some coffee shop on Pennsylvania Avenue. Keep that in mind as you watch Petraeus invent a new lease on folly - and Congress yet again buy in.

his band of thugs supported by big corporations.

Isn't it all about money money money money and greed?

The working class is so screwed!