Beinart is at least honest enough to admit that not all the decrease in casualties in Iraq in 2008 was due to the Bush/Petraeus surge, but he still gives it a fair amount of fluffing.
Then, as per the headline, he says liberal activists under the age of 30 are as bad as Bushies, which is just bullshit.
First, let’s analyze the other factors Beinart charitably lists along with the surge:
• Moqtada al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army stands down. True for now, but, will that remain the case when those surge troops go to Afghanistan? Not too likely.
• The Anbar Awakening started before the surge.
And, Beinart admits we don’t know that the lower level of violence will last. Given that Petraeus, if not Nim Chimpsky at 1600 Pennsylvania, knew the surge was not a permanent answer, it’s premature for Beinart to claim it “worked.”
Especially when Michael O’Hanlon is your main empirical source.
A skeptical leftist's, or post-capitalist's, or eco-socialist's blog, including skepticism about leftism (and related things under other labels), but even more about other issues of politics. Free of duopoly and minor party ties. Also, a skeptical look at Gnu Atheism, religion, social sciences, more.
Note: Labels can help describe people but should never be used to pin them to an anthill.
As seen at Washington Babylon and other fine establishments
January 18, 2009
Beinart – ‘Surge worked’ he said snottily
Labels:
Beinart (Peter),
Iraq surge,
O'Hanlon (Michael)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment