What is perhaps most striking about the Democratic proposals, at least in terms of their timing, is that they are advocating withdrawal at precisely the moment when the new strategy, which has been in place barely a month, is beginning to show signs of progress.
As Gen. Peter Petraeus noted in a recent press briefing, the Iraqi Council of Ministers has agreed on a hydrocarbon law and sent it to the Iraqi Parliament for approval; sectarian killings in Baghdad have been lower over the past several weeks; sectarian displacement of families is down, with some families beginning to return to their neighborhoods; a number of tribes in Anbar Province have joined with coalition forces to fight terrorists operating there. The Iraqi government has completed the deployment of three Iraqi army brigades to the capital, and the Iraqi legislature passed a $41 billion budget that includes $10 billion for reconstruction and capital improvements. And Gen. Petraeus has only received two of the five brigades he has been promised. More are on the move.
It is still far too early to predict the outcome of events in Iraq. Whether the progress can be sustained is an open question--but the wisdom of rigid timetables for withdrawal and setting a cap on troops levels is not. These are deeply irresponsible ideas; if they were to come to pass a calamity, and rivers of blood, would follow in their wake.
Thursday, March 22, 2007
WSJ: McGovernism Returns: Iraq and the "Come home, America" Democrats looks at the Democrats attempts to impose operational restrictions on our Commander In Chief in a time of war and a timetable for withdrawl from Iraq. It is, of course, outside their Constitituional powers to do so, and falls right into the hands of our enemies. Of particular note: