Three Views of the Surge in Iraq

I was going through the links on my blog and my web site to see what people had to offer in the way of insightful viewpoints.

One of the first things to catch my eye was this entry from Soldiers for the Truth. The folks who write there are some hard core, yet practical Patriots. Their loyalty to this country and those who wear its uniforms is steadfast. At the same time, like a protective mama she-bear, they can’t stand to see military people short-changed.

So, anyway, the article that caught my eye was entitled, “How to Win in Iraq”. Read through it. It’s a terrific illustration of what Liddell Hart called the indirect approach and is entirely in keeping with one of my favorite quotes from Sun Tzu. “The acme (the peak) of war fighting skill is to win without fighting.” Here’s a link. Read it for yourself.

The next article I saw was from two guys from the Brookings Institution. The first article above says the surge isn’t working and here is what we need to do instead. This article says the surge is working and is titled “A War We Just Might Win”. The writers declare that even though they were one of President Bush’s strongest critics, they think we may have discovered the way to succeed. (My own argument is that yes, of course, we are successful in the places we can bring sufficient forces to bear. The problem is we have never had, do not have now, and will not have in the future sufficient numbers of forces to do a complete job. And we do not have the will or the funding to put forward those sufficient numbers. That’s why the first article appeals to me so much.)

And then, lo and behold, I found this article by Glen Greenwald and discover that the writers of the second article, far from being the war’s “strongest critics” are instead two of its biggest cheerleaders. Read Greenwald’s article at the following link.

I hope you enjoy the contrast between the three.