THE ONLY EFFECTIVE SURGE: THE VOICES CRITICISING THE IRAQ OCCUPATION

Lugar, Warner, Voinovich and Mc Connell. Recognize these names? These are stalwart veteran Republican leaders in the legislative bodies who can no longer hold their tongues any more. They can no longer sit idly by and watch this administration's failed policies, trumped up rationales and complete lack of cognitive thought or planning in the invasion, and occupation of Iraq, drag this country down a spiralling crevasse of ineptitude any longer.

Monday, Richard Lugar took the floor of the senate late in the evening and delivered a 50 minute speech outlining his thoughts, and frustrations of his unheeded advise and counsel to the Bush administration. Lugar, the top Republican on the foreign relations committee, is arguably the smartest guy in the room wherever he goes. Mild mannered and certainly not prone to public displays of party disloyalty or confrontation, it was painfully obvious to everyone that he could stand (at least) publically silent any longer.

Here is an excerpt or two of the speech. You can read it, or read it in its entirety here.

"In my judgment, our course in Iraq has lost contact with our vital national security interests in the Middle East and beyond. Our continuing absorption with military activities in Iraq is limiting our diplomatic assertiveness there and elsewhere in the world. The prospects that the current “surge” strategy will succeed in the way originally envisioned by the President are very limited within the short period framed by our own domestic political debate. And the strident, polarized nature of that debate increases the risk that our involvement in Iraq will end in a poorly planned withdrawal that undercuts our vital interests in the Middle East."

"American strategy must adjust to the reality that sectarian factionalism will not abate anytime soon and probably cannot be controlled from the top. "

"The window during which we can continue to employ American troops in Iraqi neighborhoods without damaging our military strength or our ability to respond to other national security priorities is closing."

A course change should happen now, while there is still some possibility of constructing a sustainable bipartisan strategy in Iraq. If the President waits until the presidential election campaign is in full swing, the intensity of confrontation on Iraq is likely to limit U.S. options.
I am not implying that debate on Iraq is bad. I am suggesting what most Senate observers understand intuitively: little nuance or bipartisanship will be possible if the Iraq debate plays out during a contentious national election that will determine control of the White House and Congress. In short, our political time line will not support a rational course adjustment in Iraq, unless such an adjustment is initiated very soon.

If we are to seize opportunities to preserve these interests, the Administration and Congress must suspend what has become almost knee-jerk political combat over Iraq. Those who offer constructive criticism of the surge strategy are not defeatists, any more than those who warn against a precipitous withdrawal are militarists.