Dangerous messages

Washington Times ^ | 3/24/07 | By Jim Saxton

[JohnHuang2]

Those in Congress who argue setting a deadline or a schedule for the "redeployment" of U.S. military forces from Iraq, based on the claim we must send the Iraqis a message about getting their security and political act together, should think further about how others will interpret this same "message."

Clearly, we should take prudent steps to help and encourage Iraqi leaders to accelerate their efforts to secure their country so their government can function. However, sending this message by setting a timeframe for redeploying U.S. troops will only irreparably damage Iraq and harm future American generations.

Surely, there are others in addition to the Iraqis who will hear "the message." Take, for example, the radicals who are associated with al Qaeda and the Sunni insurgency. Certainly, they will hear "a message," which will tell them Americans are tired of the war and U.S. leaders have voted to bring the troops home. In their eyes, all they will now have to do is wait for us to leave. This interpretation would only bolster those who understand full well they cannot defeat American military forces on the battlefield, but whose sole intention is to convince American decisionmakers that the war is not worth fighting in hopes their efforts will lead to U.S. troops leaving.

[ClaireSolt]

I don't buy the underlying premise. No one has ever shown that the Iraqis are insufficiently motivated to step up. Condi says they lack the capacity and that is what we are building. With their ties to Hollywood, Dems seem to think they should just go see the Wizard of Oz to get what they need to govern. Then Nancy can click the heels of her ruby slippers three times and spirit the troops back to Kansas to perfect their readiness.