Success as a problem
In last week’s Upsider, I theorized that anti-war lawmakers in D.C. are treating the Iraq war more as a political issue than a moral one. In other words, their actions to date demonstrate more of a desire to score political points than a principled stand.
Today, House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) talked of the negative impact of a positive surge report from General Petraeus, lending credence to that position:
“I think there would be enough support in that group to want to stay the course and if the Republicans were to stay united as they have been, then it would be a problem for us,” Clyburn said.
I, for one, find it a tad troubling that the House Majority Whip speaks of progress in Iraq not in terms of the benefit to Iraq and the U.S., but in terms of difficulties it creates for Democrats who want an end to the war at any cost.
UPDATE: The last few days have seen rather astounding indications of surge successes. The Brookings Institutes’ Michael O’Hanlon and Kenneth Pollack penned “A War We Just Might Win,” and then there is this from the NYT’s John Burns:
I think there’s no doubt that those extra 30,000 American troops are making a difference. They’re definitely making a difference in Baghdad. Some of the crucial indicators of the war, metrics as the American command calls them, have moved in a positive direction from the American, and dare I say the Iraqi point of view, fewer car bombs, fewer bombs in general, lower levels of civilian casualties, quite remarkably lower levels of civilian casualties. And add in what they call the Baghdad belts, that’s to say the approaches to Baghdad, particularly in Diyala Province to the northeast, to in the area south of Baghdad in Babil Province, and to the west of Baghdad in Anbar Province, there’s no doubt that al Qaeda has taken something of a beating.
Michael Barone weighs in as well, and, as always, Michael Yon does the journalism not being done anywhere else.