A True Conservative

William S. Lind pulls no punches in his analysis of the Iraq war, and I've linked to him previously. Lind cuts through the shoulder deep crap the Bushistas and the media pile up with steamshovels regarding the war, those who support it, and those who oppose it.

In a recent article in my excellent hometown newspaper, the Cleveland Plain Dealer, a University of Michigan professor who specializes in Iraqi Shi'ism, Juan Cole, described them as "a Shi'ite ghetto youth gang." In fighting terms, that is a compliment, not an insult. Gangs will be one of the most important forms of combatants in Fourth Generation war (4GW). As the police in many an American city can attest, gangs are not easy to defeat. And this particular gang has both an endless source of recruits and a religious identity for which dying is seen as worthwhile. Sistani may have the support of most Shi'ites, but Sadr now has the support of most Shi'ite fighters, and that is what is likely to count...

Meanwhile, the U.S. finds itself fighting a two-front war, one front against the Shi'ite Mahdi Army, the other against the Sunnis in Anbar Province. The U.S. Marine Corps has blanked out the news from that front, but the reported toll of Marine casualties seems to be rising. To a student of German military history such as myself, two-front wars can bring unhappy memories...

Professor Cole summed up the situation well. "The Americans will win militarily," he said. "But I think they are losing politically," because by fighting Sadr and his Mahdi Army they "made him a symbol of national resistance." It seems that we are damned if we do fight and damned if we don't. That's just how Fourth Generation war works, folks.

Bush et al will do anything possible to avoid a truly rational discussion of what's happening over in Iraq and Afghanistan. They will accuse anyone opposing their ridiculous and insane strategy of being soft on, or, indeed, supporting, well, take your pick: Saddam, bin Laden, Sadr, or anyone else in the pantheon of evil. By implication, they seek to assert that their way is the only way.

Fortunately, folks like Lind see through this, and point out the fallacies. And the Democrats would be well advised to look at his analysis, and give it due consideration. You don't win elections by promising to do the incumbent's job better (though almost any carbon based lifeform could do better than Dubya)--you point out the blunders.

Bush is despised by a number of true conservative, and with good reason. He's made a mockery of their position. Whether the media will awaken from their slumber before November 2nd remains to be seen...