General Pelosi's plan

[Stinger]

"Our bill calls for the redeployment of U.S. troops out of Iraq so that we can focus more fully on the real war on terror, which is in Afghanistan."
-- Speaker Nancy Pelosi, March 8

Krauthammer nails her.

RealClearPolitics - Articles - The 'Good War' and the 'Right War'

"Thought experiment: Bring in a completely neutral observer -- a Martian -- and point out to him that the United States is involved in two hot wars against radical Islamic insurgents. One is in Afghanistan, a geographically marginal backwater with no resources, no industrial and no technological infrastructure. The other is in Iraq, one of the three principal Arab states, with untold oil wealth, an educated population, an advanced military and technological infrastructure which, though suffering decay in the later Saddam years, could easily be revived if it falls into the right (i.e. wrong) hands. Add to that the fact that its strategic location would give its rulers inordinate influence over the entire Persian Gulf region, including Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the Gulf states. Then ask your Martian: Which is the more important battle? He would not even understand why you are asking the question."

"But you do not decide where to fight on the basis of history; you decide on the basis of strategic realities of the ground. You can argue about our role in creating this new front and question whether it was worth taking that risk in order to topple Saddam Hussein. But you cannot reasonably argue that in 2007 Iraq is not the most critical strategic front in the war on terror. There's no escaping its centrality. Nostalgia for the "good war'' in Afghanistan is perhaps useful in encouraging anti-war Democrats to increase funding that is really needed there. But it is not an argument for abandoning Iraq."

 

[niftydrifty]

Leave it to good ol' Chuck SourKraut, the world's worst pundit, to come up with stuff that isn't even there, and to fundamentally misunderstand what has just been said.

The Martian "thought experiment" is cute. Of course, Krauthammer's point in bringing this up is not to appear completely neutral, but to spin the issue and redefine it his way.

and btw, Nancy is not a general. she's the house speaker.

Nancy said something that is true, that the "real war on terror" (if there can be such a thing) is not in Iraq. "Insurgents" in Iraq attack civilians and Americans in Iraq because they are interested in the outcome of what will happen in Iraq. the "war on terror" was brought to Iraq when we went there.

And SourKraut said something that is true. Iraq's resources and influence upon the region are more important to American long term interests than those in Afghanistan.

Krauthammer just confused the two. When he brings up one in response to the other, he's introducing a non sequitor, a red herring. No wonder you love this guy, Stinger.

anywhere the US Military goes and fights where the opponent is overwhelmed, then they are going to have to resort to using terror as a tactic. Terrorism is a tactic. This tactic has been around for hundreds of years. And it's not going to go away because we want it to. Nancy sounds confused when she uses this Administration rhetoric to talk about the threat. And Charles sounds confused simply because he always is.