What's Going On? (With Update)

Here's an interesting opening para from a recent AP story out of Baghdad: A key aide says Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's relations with Gen. David Petraeus are so poor the Iraqi leader may ask Washington to withdraw the overall U.S. commander from his Baghdad post.
(The story is by STEVEN R. HURST and QASSIM ABDUL-ZAHRA, Associated Press Writers, dated July 28, 2007, "Heat rises between Iraq PM and Petraeus." The link is to a dallasnews.com site.)

So, the man who is named by President bush tens of times a month as being the person who will give us the report in September is at odds with the Prime Minister of Iraq?

The PM is upset because the General is too comfy with Sunnis which tends to kill off Shias like the PM?

The PM doesn't like what our "decider" on the scene is doing/planning?

According to the story our Ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker, admits to "sporty exchanges" between the two men.

Wow.

Before we allow the "report" in September to mire us in this unhappy mess, we should take time to insist that someone, somewhere, verify before place our trust in further involvement in this obvious sectarian strife in Iraq.

UPDATE

The Los Angeles Times reports that Petraeus dismissed as "ludicrous" a report that Maliki felt he could no longer work with the general.

The problem, according to the Times article, is with the conflicts between Sunni and Shia adversaries.

---We'll see whether the AP or the LAT has the correct version. In any event, Petraeus' credibility is in jeopardy.

Sphere: Related Content

Bacevich, Bush, Islam

Gentle Reader, hie thee to this Los Angeles Times link for Andrew J. Bacevich's op-ed piece, "More troops, more troubles," subtitled, "Candidates who call for beefing up our armed forces to deter terrorism show a profound misunderstanding of the Mideast."

Bacevich dismisses calls for a larger U.S. armed force which are being made by many--and, for the purposes of this essay, especially presidential nominee contenders. He calls, instead, for an "alternative" plan to Bush's failed strategy.

Money quote: "To pass muster, any such strategy will have to recognize the limits of American power, military and otherwise. It must acknowledge that because the United States cannot change Islam, we have no alternative but to coexist with it.

Yet coexistence should not imply appeasement or passivity. Any plausible strategy will prescribe concrete and sustainable policies designed to contain the virulent strain of radicalism currently flourishing in parts of the Islamic world. The alternative to transformation is not surrender but quarantine.

Over time, of course, Islam will become something other than what it is today. But as with our own post-Christian West, that evolution will be determined primarily by forces within. Our interest lies in nudging that evolution along a path that alleviates rather than perpetuates conflict between Islam and the West. In that regard, the requirement is not for a bigger Army but for fresh ideas, informed by modesty and a sense of realism."

We cannot delay. We must assist those 21st century Muslims who see the wisdom in modernizing their religion.

We must take to heart the too obvious fact that reform cannot be changed by military threat.

Sphere: Related Content

Petraeus = Truth?

General Petraeus has told Congress and reporters that we will have U.S. troops in Iraq for a very long time. The implication is that regardless of who occupies the White House on January 21, 2009, we will be there.

Petraeus is the first general who has the administration's support for a larger troop deployment in Iraq.

Would the White House had done sufficient planning before setting out on this adventure.

Would the Congress, regardless of the party in power in the administration, had done its Constitutional duty in oversight.

Trust, but verify.

Iraq
Republicans
Administration

Sphere: Related Content

Genocide or Fruits of War?

On page A18 of The Los Angeles Times, 4/23/07, the Turkish embassy presents a full page ad, "Let's Unearth the Truth about What Happened in 1915 Together."

It calls for "a joint commission of historians [from Turkey and Armenia] which will also be open to third parties.

The ad also gives the embassy's website: www.turkishembassy.org for further information.

A visit to the website eventually brought up this quote,
from a "Statement by Turkish Ambassador Nabi Şensoy on the PBS Program "The Armenian Genocide" which was released on April 18, 2006, "Turkey itself has pursued the facts via numerous collaborative efforts. Last year, Prime Minister Erdoğan issued an unprecedented proposal to Armenian President Kocharian for an impartial study of the matter through the establishment of a joint historical commission, a landmark opening that has yet to receive a favorable response."

If Turkey is offering to participate in such an historical review, then the U.S. should support such a venture.

This seems like a good time to exercise "trust, but verify."

Genocide
Turkey
Armenia

Sphere: Related Content