BCT Editorial – 2/26/08

This page was last updated on February 26, 2008.

Close call; Editorial; Beaver County Times; February 26, 2008.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“One reason the U.S. troop surge in Iraq has had any success is because radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr has reined in his militia for the last six months.

“So you can be sure the Bush administration breathed a sigh of relief now that al-Sadr has extended his militia’s cease-fire for another six months.

“Al-Sadr showed a flair for the dramatic in revealing his decision. He kept it a secret until the last minute. Shiite clerics around Iraq opened his sealed statement and read it at Friday prayer services.

“This was good news for American troops who are stationed in that country and Iraqis because Al-Sadr’s cease-fire has been a key component in the troop surge.”

[RWC] As a reminder, al-Sadr fled Iraq for Iran (or simply went into hiding for three months) at the beginning of the 2007 U.S. troop surge. That was no coincidence. The surge reached full strength during the summer and shortly thereafter al-Sadr announced his ceasefire. That too was no coincidence.

This reminds me of the people who refuse to give the U.S. – and especially President Reagan – any credit for the fall of the Soviet Union. These folks want us to believe former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev engineered the USSR collapse.

“Another factor has been U.S. success in buying the loyalty of Sunni tribal leaders in the anti-insurgency effort.”

[RWC] Note the drive-by accusation that we’re “buying the loyalty of Sunni tribal leaders” with no supporting evidence. I follow this stuff pretty closely and this is the first time I’ve read/heard anything about buying loyalty. Every report I’ve seen indicated Iraqis got fed up with being killed by al-Qaida and other “insurgents” and the surge convinced them the U.S. wasn’t going to leave them hanging as we did in 1991. This comment’s purpose is to cheapen the successful efforts of our troops.

“Keep these two factors in mind whenever anyone in the Bush administration boosts [sic] about the surge working. It’s not just the increase in U.S. troop strength, as significant as that is. A major reason it is working is because of some pretty unsavory characters, starting with al-Sadr, have agreed to go along with it.”

[RWC] “[P]retty unsavory characters … agreed to go along with” the surge? Yeah, sure. They “agreed” to avoid being killed either by U.S. troops or U.S.-trained Iraqi forces. It’s that simple, but the Times can’t admit it because of its editorial history and its investment in defeat.

“But don’t be fooled, though. Iraq’s Sunni-Shiite civil war hasn’t been ended. It’s only been postponed.”

[RWC] Translation: “With any luck on our (the Times and fellow travelers) part, the civil war that wasn’t could still happen. Let’s keep our fingers crossed.”