I am not trying to provoke by this exactly, but I see again and again people very sincerely claiming the war in Iraqi is a military disaster.
I don’t see it that way, but I am open-minded and am willing to be convinced.
First and foremost it is a war. All wars are horrible. Nice people die. Lots of people have died in Iraq, and will continue to do so. That is simply the nature of war and is not de facto evidence of a military disaster.
It looks like the Americans are punting on the all-important reconstruction effort. That is a worry. The Administration seems to be puzzled by the enormity of the task.
But I cannot help but think that in five years these local difficulties will be forgotten.
There are a lot of questions that ask “how can the Americans possibly win?” May I reverse the question and ask how the Old Regime can win?
The resistance does not project a coordinated political front (yet). They have not shown any ability or interest in rallying the Iraqi people to them.
It seems obvious that the Iraqi people are about fed up with the resistance. I predict that there will soon be a popular backlash against them. (Of course, I could be wrong.)
The resistance is inept, able to produce less than one dead American per day. Often traffic accidents kill more Americans in the region than that. How will that level of combat power force out the Americans?
Like I said, I am interested in hearing why my appreciation of the situation is wrong. I hope we can move beyond the “war is bad” argument.