Iraq War: choosing from "a lousy range of options"

McClatchy's Warren Strobel, who has done some of the best English-language reporting on the Iraq War from the buildup forward, reports on how Bush left with few options, even fewer chances for success in Iraq 08/24/07:

One way to look at the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq released this week is to review what it describes as the best-case scenario.

In that scenario, Iraq's security will improve modestly over the next six to 12 months, but violence across the country will remain high. The U.S.-backed central government will grow more fragile and remain unable to govern. Shiite and Sunni Muslims will continue their bitter feuding. All sides will position themselves for an eventual American departure.

In Iraq, best-case scenarios have rarely, if ever, come to pass.

But for Bush and the neocons, they didn't invade the real existing Iraq, they invaded the Iraq of their dreams. So they still dream up progress and turning points and tipping points and so on, and will keep doing so even though reality has long since caught up with their splendid little Mesopotamian war.

Strobel's article gives a good, brief description of the way that Cheney and Bush are "hemmed in by decisions he and others made months or years ago." (He uses the more diplomatic term that their appear to be so.) Or, as Strobel quotes Andrew Bacevich as saying, they are left with only "a lousy range of options".

It's been the case for a while that there were no good options left for exiting Iraq. As time goes on, even the menu of bad options shrinks. Cheney and Bush clearly have a permanent presence in mind, despite the fact that Congress has officially declared such an intent not to be the policy of the US.

Tags: iraq war, warren strobel

| +Save/Share | |