A New Plan?

Both this weeks' Economist and today's Chicago Tribune have editorials about finding a new plan to solve the Iraqi War. The Economist lays out a few ideas: more troops, partitioning the country, pulling out, pulling back to safe areas. It then tries to debunk each idea. And I agree that none are ideal options.

The Tribune talks about the work of the Iraq Study Group lead by James Baker III. In the end they talk of setting milestones and setting deadlines for the Iraqi government to meet them. They also say that the Iraq Study Group is likely to suggest that the U.S. talk with Iran and Syria. Of course, they don't answer the "or else" question. If Iraq doesn't meet the milestones and Iran rebuffs us what do we do?

I don't know if the Iraq War was ever winnable. I know that after much agonizing and trying to read everything I could get to with a modem that I was opposed to going into the country to begin with. Since I've wanted to make it work. To "win" if you will. But I don't have an answer and it is killing American soldiers and draining our national treasure.

The Iraq Study Group is expected to release its consensus opinion in January 2007. If they do come up with a new, smart idea I have two questions. Why couldn't the Bushies come up with that strategy? The answer is the same as when we ask why we're in this mess. The administration is incompetent. Which leads to the second question, why should we have any expectation that they could implement a new strategy successfully? I think the answer is a clear and resounding, NO.