Sunday, June 14, 2015

If Only The Washington Post Editorial Board Read The Post's Reporting

From a news report on today's once great Washington Post Bezos Bugle front page:
As President Obama was weighing how to halt Islamic State advances in Iraq, some of the strongest resistance to boosting U.S. involvement came from a surprising place: a war-weary military that has grown increasingly skeptical that force can prevail in a conflict fueled by political and religious grievances.
Top military officials, who have typically argued for more combat power to overcome battlefield setbacks over the past decade, emerged in recent White House debates as consistent voices of caution in Iraq. Their shift reflects the paucity of good options and a reluctance to suffer more combat deaths in a war in which America’s political leaders are far from committed and Iraqis have shown limited will to fight.
“After the past 12 years in the Middle East, there is a real focus by senior military leaders on understanding what the endgame is,” said a military official, “and asking the question, ‘To what end are we doing this?’ ”  (our emphasis)
From the lead editorial in today's once great Washington Post Bezos Bugle:
Mr. Obama’s escalation nevertheless is most notable for excluding the steps that American and Iraqi commanders and military experts have been saying for a year are necessary to decisively reverse the Islamic State’s momentum. These include the deployment of U.S. advisers to front-line Iraqi units, along with spotters who can call in airstrikes, and an increase of close-in air support.
Such tactics worked during the U.S. “surge” in Iraq, and they allowed Afghanistan’s Northern Alliance to overthrow the Taliban government in 2001-2002. That they are not being used now, despite the Islamic State’s recent gains, seems to be explained only by Mr. Obama’s political resistance to reversing his decision to withdraw U.S. forces four years ago(our emphasis)
Perhaps it's too much to expect the neo-conservatives on the Post's Bugle's editorial board =cough= Fred Hiatt =cough= "Action" Jackson Diehl =cough= to absorb the reporting of their own staff, or to ever ask "to what end are we doing this?"  Rather than being confused with the facts, they prefer to continue to bang the neo-con drum in an effort to browbeat  President Obama (contrary to the advice of his military officials) into sending someone else's children into war.  Of course, both Diehl and Hiatt were vociferous cheerleaders for Dumbya's Iraq misadventure War and, to no one's surprise, have learned precisely nothing from that experience.  Also, we seem to recall that one of the policies President Obama ran on in 2008 was to bring the troops home from Iraq (in accordance with the timetable set by the status of forces agreement with Iraq signed by -- wait for it -- the Post's Bugle's "surge" hero Dumbya). 

No, it seems the neo-cons of the editorial board are determined to have the United States make the same mistakes they foolishly counseled back in 2003.  Fortunately, no one is listening to them.

(Image:   Fightin' 101st Keyboarder Jackson Diehl -- or is that "J. Fred Muggs" Hiatt?)

No comments: