Is there nothing new in the universe? UPDATED

In the NYT this morning I learn that President George W. Bush is planning to set down more 'benchmarks' for the Iraqi leaders. Haven't we been here before? Specifically the Iraqi government will be expected to try to ease sectarian tensions and stabilize the country politically and economically. Isn't that what we have been asking them to do for the entire length of this war?

Among these “benchmarks” are steps that would draw more Sunnis into the political process, finalize a long-delayed measure on the distribution of oil revenue and ease the government’s policy toward former Baath Party members, the officials said.

Part of the new 'way forward' calls for sending additional American troops into Baghdad’s toughest neighborhoods. Again, haven't we been here before? Blah3 asks, "Didn’t the warmongers tell us before we invaded this practically defenseless country that house-to-house fighting would never happen?" Ok, that was crude, but the question is valid. In truth we have been going door-to-door for a long time. I don't see any way NOT to go door-to-door, do you?

Cop the Truth has an interesting take on our present situation in Iraq. See what you think:

Being a fan of Westerns, I caught an old one this afternoon: High Noon. The synopsis of the movie is simple: a small town, with the help of a new Sheriff, finally stands up to a group of thugs, sending the leader off to prison and banishing his henchmen. For years, all is well and quiet.

One day, word comes that the leader has been pardoned. As his former henchmen arrive back in town, fear spreads that the leader will return, as he promised, and extract revenge for his imprisonment. The townspeople, who once backed the Sheriff, urge him to leave, seeking to avoid the inevitable confrontation. The judge who sentenced the leader flees in fear. The citizens of the town refuse to help the Sheriff, leaving him, alone, to confront the danger.

Naturally, the Sheriff kills all of the bad guys and rides off into the sunset. He kept his word to protect the town, even without their aid, thereby fulfilling his duty as he saw it.

Doesn't that sound a lot like our situation in Iraq?

After that introduction, Cop the Truth gets down to strategy, Rules of Engagement, the problems with Iran and Syria. Go see what he has to say.

The main problem I see, is our military cannot tell the good guys from the bad guys, they all look alike, dress alike, ... until the bombs start going off that is. We have bad guys from Iran and who really knows where else, including the Iraqis who are fighting each other as well as our military. Maybe the Democrats have a point. Pull back and let them go at it, see what happens. It's just an idea.

On Israel taking out Iran's nukes, Islamanzi suggests that IRAN is the one who leaked/created this news. Interesting idea (why didn't I think of that?), and I have to agree it is a possibility. On Iraq, Islamanazi says that Bush has NO new Iraq strategy - none. But he does say:

In other words, he’s already decided to escalate this war in the middle of a civil war, against the advice of his most able advisors and against the will of about 75% of the American people.

Not only that, but he’s fired Ms. Miers, his lawyer, and hired some really big guns as well as 4 more White House counsel assistants.

The Republicans can't even agree with each other on Iraq, we certainly can't expect the Democrats to agree with a new Bush policy, if there is one. William Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard magazine, is the only one I have heard who completely supports Bush, even though he and Frederick Kagan, a military analyst at the American Enterprise Institute expressed concerns about the administration's blueprint for Iraq even before the invasion almost four years ago.'

Bill Kristol (on Fox News Sunday, via News Hounds: ...But Bush has decided he's going to fight to win. ..." [snip]

... Still, the question is: Is it in our national interest to lose this war in Iraq? You know, all this talk about redeployment, the one sentence we didn't quote from the Pelosi-Reid letter is the key one, I think - (reading) 'It is time to bring the war to a close.' That's what underlies the critics of the war's view. They don't have an alternative strategy. A few do. A few do. Pull back. Deploy forces around Kurdistan. I haven't heard that argued very well but that's what this really is about. What this is about is quote bringing the war to a close. The war's not going to be brought to a close. If we withdraw, the war's gonna get worse. More Iraqis are gonna get killed. Does anyone doubt that? 2007 is going to be a bloody year in Iraq. Period. That's just a fact. The question is whether it's a bloody year on the path to success for the U. S. in a vital, strategic interest or whether we lose."

I hope Mr. Kristol is right about Bugh deciding to WIN this war, because victory is the only outcome that should expect.

But don't worry about things, because the Democrats are now on the job, promising to work five days a week, no slacking ..... Oops, no they are not. They took today 'off because of the National Championship football game between Ohio State and Florida State.' Read about the slackers at Webloggin and Big Dog's Weblog "Congressional Math: Five Day Work Week Equals Four"

UPDATE: Two other thoughts. One, PoliZoo points out, "What good is a list of benchmarks if there is no clear penalty for failure?" That's one reason the benchmarks have not worked in the past, there is no "or what" attached to them, no incentives or consequences. In Surge stuff, PoliZoo has a good roundup of articles and blog comments on the topic.

Second, Bush wants to spend more money, lots of it. Called the "... "make-work program similar to the New Deal." It is expected to cost at least $1 billion. I personally can't see how businesses, jobs, construction of infrastructure, etc. can go on with all the violence. Yes, we should be able to multi-task and do more than one thing at a time. It may not matter, since Democrats are against any more money for Iraq.

The HILL Chronicles reports some items of interest. Layla says: 1) Pelosi said she is now willing to cut off money for the whole war, but will demand justification for any new funding. 2) The report concludes that: The Arab-Israeli conflict is inextricably linked to Iraq. Really? I can’t think of a single issue in the region it is less linked to. Go read her analysis here.

Linked with
Jihad, at Biga's Rants
Common Sense America, All eyes on Israel

Comments

[MinorRipper]

Well let's just hope any new 'surge' doesn't include too many of these troops (see link)...
http://minor-ripper.blogspot.com/2006/12/winning-hearts-and-minds-part-three.html

[spree]

Congratulations on the Blogger Halo Award Debbie!!!!!