My friends on the American right continue
to insist that the war in Iraq is going well.
However, there are certain signs that
continue to make me wonder how true
that it is in the larger scheme of things.

The New York Times is reporting today
that al-Maliki has lost considerable support
from the "Sunni bloc," his Shiite allies, the
tribal leadership, and the Kurds. He is also
reported to be quite "paranoid." The last
leaders I've heard described in that manner
were the late Shah of Iran, Fidel Castro,
Hugo Chavez, the late Mao Zedong and
the late Joseph Stalin - not exactly sterling
company. It also suggests that very few
actually support the guy.


Two days ago, the commander in the north,
a General Nixon, suggested that *a* level of
American troops would have to stay in the
country "for a number of years." Friday's
AZ Republic quoted a story suggesting that
"temporarily," (until next spring), that troop
levels inside the country would rise to
171,000 and yesterday AP reported that
there were close to that number of "private
contractors" incountry armed to the teeth,
and shooting at both civilians and Iraqi
soldiers. Can we really afford a
committment of "years to come?"

Although the surge is reported to have
slowed down violence, General Odierno,
the number 2 US commander in the country,
suggested that Shiite militias are responsible
for as much of the violence as Al Qaeda in
Iraq is at this point. The General also
suggested that withdrawals of the surge
troops would occur between April and
August of next year, and that the military
"right now, our plan is not to backfill those
units" (replace them). Odierno also stated
that 48% of attacks in July came from Shiite
militias and that they have grown stronger
since the surge began.

The Fund for Peace announced that next
week they will release a report calling for
the "managed breakup" of Iraq into three
autonomous entities, suggesting that
Iraq is "now nearing total collapse." The
report looks at 12 key indicators from the
economy to political factionalization to
the rule of law, and suggests that the
"country is divided in irretrievable ways."

I cannot make an argument for splitting the
country, yet, as one continues to hope that
they *could* reconcile their differences. But,
collapse appears closer despite the gains
made, especially in outside of Baghdad
provinces, but even there there is a whisper
or two of rising violence recurring in these
areas where US troop presence has been
cut back in recent months.

Looking at "the big picture," and not the small
successes pointed out by some (this, too,
reminiscent of Vietnam reporting), al-Maliki's
government is hanging on by its toenails, and
is slowly sliding down a wall. Reconciliation is
a mirage, and even less possible now that 17
ministers have deserted the cabinet in the past
month. I would grant military successes readily,
although some 50 people a day are *still* being
killed there, and still roughly three Americans
are being killed every day, but political success
is a total illusion. It is *NOT* occurring, no
matter all the optimism folks have about the
killing of this or that band of rebels, insurgents
or militias or success or near success or this
or that piece of reconstruction.

The other wild card here not being addressed
is that Iran, despite its vigorous denials, *is*
meddling in the situation, and they *are* the
big dog in the neighborhood - much more armed
than even Iraq was, with three times the people,
and with the purpose of subverting Iraq's
government firmly being operated upon more and
more, if the latest reports can be believed at all.
Although suggestions made by this writer and
others that an attack on Iran was in the cards at
some juncture (and the Vice President continues
to advocate such), the critics are so far right -
such an attack against this troublemaker has
yet to occur. But does the fact that such hasn't
happened up to this point continue to preclude
its eventuality?

All of this adds up to *some* good news on the
military front, today, this week, this month. On
the political front, collapse or open civil war lurks
behind every corner. *That* is what I object to
my rightist friends ignoring. I can concede a
victory here and there militarily, even some amount
of reconstruction succeeding, while seeing also
that Basra is unraveling (and will even more when
the British leave), the north is threatened by possible
Turkish attack, and Baghdad itself is locked deeply
in hidden struggle as Shiites engage in covert ethnic
cleansing of every Sunni they can find. The militias
are not controlled by anyone in the government,
and they are stronger than ever if the US military
is to be believed (and I do believe them). Al-Maliki
has almost no control over anything, and his
predecessor Allawi is apparently plotting against
him.

How can those who believe the small things are
working right fail to see the larger picture and see
that things are perilously screwed up? How long
can we as a country remain silent about what is
happening when failure is so evident on the larger
plane? Small successes are not enough, and if the
government collapses all those small gains will be
swept away in a heartbeat. I suggest that the
government grows closer daily to disintegration.
Then what will happen? VMS


Note: Written Sun, 19 Aug 2007 20:09:06