# Surge Without End, Amen **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 9, 2007, 1:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/surge-without-end-amen/403379 "2007-05-09T13:06:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2007, 1:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/surge-without-end-amen/403379/1 "2007-05-09T13:06:42Z")
It seems like just yesterday that everyone was saying September was the drop-dead date to demonstrate progress in Iraq, or call it a day. In September, the Defense Department was going to evaluate the ‘surge’ and see whether any headway had been made towards a more peacable, secure Iraq. In September, even a bunch of GOP Congresscritters would be ready to defect if the war wasn’t going well. Hey, wait: [it _was_ just yesterday](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/07/AR2007050701689.html?nav=rss_politics)!! Today, [we find out](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/08/AR2007050802096.html?hpid=topnews) that September’s DoD evaluation doesn’t really matter; 10 brigades’ worth of replacements and reinforcements are arriving in…August. So they’ll already be there when the results of September’s evaluation come in. So that the ‘surge’ can be maintained through April 2008. And **then** the generals will decide whether to continue the ‘surge.’ > [@](#): > > “The surge needs to go through the beginning of next year for sure,” said Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, the day-to-day commander for U.S. military operations in Iraq. The new requirement of up to 15-month tours for active-duty soldiers will allow the troop increase to last until spring, said Odierno, who favors keeping experienced forces in place for now. > > “What I am trying to do is to get until April so we can decide whether to keep it going or not,” he said in an interview in Baghdad last week. “Are we making progress? If we’re not making any progress, we need to change our strategy. If we’re making progress, then we need to make a decision on whether we continue to surge.” And by then, we’ll be in the middle of a Presidential campaign, as well as Congress gearing up for its own re-election campaigns. And everyone will say, “what’s the point? Only 9 months until we get a new President anyway.” Yep, the ‘surge’ has accomplished its purpose: to allow Bush to hand this debacle off to his successor. Swell. ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2007, 1:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/surge-without-end-amen/403379/2 "2007-05-09T13:13:36Z")
Earth to General: You don’t “continue the surge”. If you continue it, it’s no longer a surge, it’s become an escalation, and you need a draft to support it. If you reduce it without success, you’ve just admitted defeat. I kind of like this little “surge” trope. It’s a semantic noose that the warmongers will eventually hang themselves with. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2007, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/surge-without-end-amen/403379/3 "2007-05-09T13:38:48Z")
[QUOTE=RTFirefly] It seems like just yesterday that everyone was saying September was the drop-dead date to demonstrate progress in Iraq, or call it a day. [/QUOTE] No. Maybe that’s what you wanted to hear, but Bush never said that. Unless you have a cite…? I believe Petreaus said he thinks Congress and/or the American people will lose patience if they can’t show progress by then, but that’s not the same thing. Seems to me that what they are planning for is that, assuming the surge does show progress, they will keep it going longer. How long? Who knows. These guys seem willing to keep a military presence in Iraq as long as Congress will let them-- or until Bush is out of office, whichever comes first. But even the Republican hawks in Congress (at least some of them) are putting out the message that they need to see demonstrable progress by late summer or they are going to start setting deadlines for withdrawal. It’s going to be political suicide for most of them up for election if they go into Nov 2008 with troop levels still at what they are now. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2007, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/surge-without-end-amen/403379/4 "2007-05-09T16:08:15Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] No. Maybe that’s what you wanted to hear, but Bush never said that. Unless you have a cite…? [/quote] Who said anything about Bush in that context? From the first link in the OP (bolding mine): > [@](#): > > Petraeus has said repeatedly that it will be at least another month or two after the troops are in place before it will be possible to assess the impact of those reinforcements and, just as important, of the new U.S. approach that is moving combat troops off big, isolated bases and into dozens of smaller combat outposts across Baghdad. When he visited Washington last month, Petraeus told members of Congress that he will be ready to assess his progress by **September**. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2007, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/surge-without-end-amen/403379/5 "2007-05-09T16:54:17Z")
Well, he’s planning and assessing. Looks like he’s doing the job we typically ask generals to do. Considering the criticism leveled at the administration for not planning adequately in the past, it seems not particularly fair to criticize General Petraeus from doing so now that he is in a position to on a much larger scale. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2007, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/surge-without-end-amen/403379/6 "2007-05-09T17:03:42Z")
[QUOTE=Mr. Moto] Well, he’s planning and assessing. Looks like he’s doing the job we typically ask generals to do. Considering the criticism leveled at the administration for not planning adequately in the past, it seems not particularly fair to criticize General Petraeus from doing so now that he is in a position to on a much larger scale. [/QUOTE] Did you mean to post this in some other thread? It sure doesn’t look like a response to anything in this one. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2007, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/surge-without-end-amen/403379/7 "2007-05-09T17:22:09Z")
Since it’s relevant, here’s [the AFIS press release](http://www.militaryconnection.com/news/april-2007/evaluate-security-plan.html) about the September evaluation. The lead paragraphs: > [@](#): > > WASHINGTON, April 26, 2007 – Senior U.S. leaders on the ground in Iraq plan to evaluate the success of the new security plan and provide an assessment of the situation to Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates by early September, the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq said here today. > Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of Multinational Force Iraq, told Pentagon reporters that he and Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, will provide the assessment, which will measure progress in the areas of security, economics, governance and rule of law. > > September will be a good time for the assessment, because the additional U.S. forces that are being deployed to Iraq will have been on the ground for several months, more Iraqi security forces will be trained and equipped, and the Iraqi government will have had time to make more progress, Petraeus said. > > “We’ll have seen whether in fact our efforts in these areas have helped produce the kind of progress that they’re designed, in fact, to produce and to see if there is an exploitation of the opportunity that we believe our soldiers and Iraqi soldiers and police will have provided to the Iraqi governmental leaders to come to grips, again, with some of these really tough legislative issues,” he said. > > In the security arena, the leaders will be looking at how successful U.S. and Iraqi forces have been at securing the Iraqi population, which is essential to enable political progress, and the progress of the Iraqi security forces, Petraeus said. In the economic arena, they will evaluate how the Iraqi government is spending its money, both nationally and provincially, and the progress of private banking in the country. > > In the area of governance, Petraeus said he and Crocker will be looking for progress on key legislation and the development of governmental and ministerial capacity. Under rule of law, they will focus on the progress of Iraq’s criminal justice and detention systems, which have posed big challenges for the government, he said. It would seem that the purpose of an evaluation in the course of an operation is to determine whether to continue with it, and what adjustments need to be made. Odierno is pretty much saying the decision’s already been made to maintain the surge through April 2008 (at which point decisions will be made on whether to continue), and the August troop movements reinforce that. Correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t Odierno report to Petraeus? Seems like these guys need to be on the same page. If the September evaluation is going to be a bit of Baghdad/Beltway kabuki, then just cancel it, OK guys? ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2007, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/surge-without-end-amen/403379/8 "2007-05-09T17:50:47Z")
Even the Democrats aren’t requiring an immediate withdrawal of all troops in their proposals. Therefore, nobody supposes that we will have all troops out of the area by April even if a withdrawal begins. Given that, it would be appropriate to plan for what those troops will be doing in that timeframe to assist the Iraqi government, which will have work of its own to do. ---
**Author:** ![JayRx1981](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/71e660/32.png) [@JayRx1981](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JayRx1981)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2007, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/surge-without-end-amen/403379/9 "2007-05-09T18:05:39Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] But even the Republican hawks in Congress (at least some of them) are putting out the message that they need to see demonstrable progress by late summer or they are going to start setting deadlines for withdrawal. It’s going to be political suicide for most of them up for election if they go into Nov 2008 with troop levels still at what they are now. [/QUOTE] Maybe I’ve missed it, but did Congress, in their most recent call for withdrawal bill, actually define WHAT is considered progress in Iraq? Does Congress even have definitive standards of what qualifies as progress? Do the party platforms? Heck, has the Administration even defined it for the press? I ask only because, if they haven’t, it really will devolve into a political crapshoot (as if it hasn’t already) with varying standards for one Senator/Representative over another. I’d be happy with SOME agreed upon definitive standard, no matter the source, over the generalized “progress” I keep hearing about… ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2007, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/surge-without-end-amen/403379/10 "2007-05-09T19:44:34Z")
[QUOTE=RTFirefly] Who said anything about Bush in that context? [/quote] Well, you said “everyone”, so I’m not sure how we were supposed to determine what the context was. > [@](#): > > From the first link in the OP (bolding mine): And nothing in that link says he isn’t still planning to do that. But even though you and I don’t have much confidence in The Surge, the Pentagon has to do its planning on the assumption The Surge will show some progress so that troops can be there to continue the effort. You don’t expect them to assume their efforts will fail and that we’ll just bug out in September, do you? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2007, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/surge-without-end-amen/403379/11 "2007-05-09T19:46:08Z")
[QUOTE=JayRx1981] Maybe I’ve missed it, but did Congress, in their most recent call for withdrawal bill, actually define WHAT is considered progress in Iraq? Does Congress even have definitive standards of what qualifies as progress? Do the party platforms? Heck, has the Administration even defined it for the press? I ask only because, if they haven’t, it really will devolve into a political crapshoot (as if it hasn’t already) with varying standards for one Senator/Representative over another. I’d be happy with SOME agreed upon definitive standard, no matter the source, over the generalized “progress” I keep hearing about… [/QUOTE] I thought they did-- with the famous “benchmarks”. I don’t recall specifically what those benchmarks were, but unless certain progress was made they threat was that funding would be curtailed. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2007, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/surge-without-end-amen/403379/12 "2007-05-09T20:11:11Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] Well, you said “everyone”, so I’m not sure how we were supposed to determine what the context was. [/quote] There’s always taking a quick peek at the link. > [@](#): > > And nothing in that link says he isn’t still planning to do that. But even though you and I don’t have much confidence in The Surge, the Pentagon has to do its planning on the assumption The Surge will show some progress so that troops can be there to continue the effort. You don’t expect them to assume their efforts will fail and that we’ll just bug out in September, do you? I would think that points where choices of actions could easily diverge would be just after, rather than just before, points at which evaluations occur on which such choices would naturally be based. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2007, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/surge-without-end-amen/403379/13 "2007-05-09T20:21:55Z")
[QUOTE=RTFirefly] There’s always taking a quick peek at the link. [/quote] There’s always being clear in the OP, too. 🙂 I read the link, I just didn’t follow your train of thought. Also, it looks like that particular general is speaking out of turn: > [@](#): > > [U.S. could look to cut Iraq troops this year: Gates](http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070509/pl_nm/usa_iraq_gates_dc_1) > > Defense Secretary Robert Gates said on Wednesday the United States could consider reducing troop levels in > Iraq later this year, contradicting comments by a senior military commander. > > Gates said a progress report in September from Gen. David Petraeus, the overall commander in Iraq, and the U.S. ambassador there would determine the future of the higher troop levels ordered by > President George W. Bush in January. > > “The outcome of that evaluation is not foreordained,” Gates told the defense subcommittee of the Senate’s Appropriations Committee. ---
**Author:** ![JayRx1981](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/71e660/32.png) [@JayRx1981](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JayRx1981)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2007, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/surge-without-end-amen/403379/14 "2007-05-09T20:28:18Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] I thought they did-- with the famous “benchmarks”. I don’t recall specifically what those benchmarks were, but unless certain progress was made they threat was that funding would be curtailed. [/QUOTE] After a little bit of google searching, I couldn’t find mention of what the actual benchmarks congress wants are, save for a reference in one article to the next bill possibly requiring the administration give them a “roadmap” of various economic and other benchmarks before more funding would be approved–and that a number of legislators rumbling for this are Republicans. ---
**Author:** ![LilShieste](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/9f8e36/32.png) [@LilShieste](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LilShieste)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2007, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/surge-without-end-amen/403379/15 "2007-05-09T20:30:51Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] There’s always being clear in the OP, too. 🙂 I read the link, I just didn’t follow your train of thought. Also, it looks like that particular general is speaking out of turn: [/QUOTE] If only we had some sort of “War Czar”, so things like this wouldn’t happen. 😉 LilShieste ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2007, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/surge-without-end-amen/403379/16 "2007-05-09T20:47:50Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] There’s always being clear in the OP, too. 🙂 [/quote] There is that, I suppose. 😃 > [@](#): > > Also, it looks like that particular general is speaking out of turn: Let’s hope so. This is certainly one instance where I’d be pleased to find out I’m wrong. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2007, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/surge-without-end-amen/403379/17 "2007-05-09T20:48:18Z")
[QUOTE=LilShieste] If only we had some sort of “War Czar”, so things like this wouldn’t happen. 😉 [/QUOTE] Are you volunteering? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![LilShieste](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/9f8e36/32.png) [@LilShieste](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LilShieste)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2007, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/surge-without-end-amen/403379/18 "2007-05-09T21:03:23Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] Are you volunteering? 😉 [/QUOTE] It’s a _volunteer_ position? No wonder they’re having such a hard time filling it! 😃 LilShieste ---
**Author:** ![marshmallow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@marshmallow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/marshmallow)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2007, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/surge-without-end-amen/403379/19 "2007-05-09T21:16:31Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] But even the Republican hawks in Congress (at least some of them) are putting out the message that they need to see demonstrable progress by late summer or they are going to start setting deadlines for withdrawal. It’s going to be political suicide for most of them up for election if they go into Nov 2008 with troop levels still at what they are now. [/QUOTE] So if the pro-war Republicans only support the Iraqi disaster for 4.5 years they will be electable but if they do it for 5.5 years the American electorate will revolt en masse to…the Democrats? I’d really like to believe, deep down, that the American people aren’t that dumb. But… Regardless, I’m not going to hold my breath for all these war supporters to start asking for timetables. If they do I’ll be on pins and needles waiting for them to justify their reversal after all these years and why we suddenly need to implement a plan they painted as naive or unpatriotic or whatever only six months before. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2007, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/surge-without-end-amen/403379/20 "2007-05-09T21:22:01Z")
[QUOTE=mstay] So if the pro-war Republicans only support the Iraqi disaster for 4.5 years they will be electable but if they do it for 5.5 years the American electorate will revolt en masse to…the Democrats? I’d really like to believe, deep down, that the American people aren’t that dumb. But… [/QUOTE] Not the American people. Just the Republicans. 😃 Seriously, though, that’s about it. Most Americans supported the war up until a year or two ago-- they just don’t what their politicians to be \*too \*far behind. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/surge-without-end-amen/403379.md?page=2)