Adrift In Iraq

"Meanwhile, the U.S. military—the only force in Iraq remotely capable of keeping the country from falling apart—finds itself in a maddening situation where tactical victories yield strategic setbacks. The Marines could readily defeat the insurgents in Najaf, but only at the great risk of inflaming Shiites—and sparking still larger insurgencies—elsewhere. In the Sadr City section of Baghdad, as U.S. commanders acknowledge, practically every resident is an insurgent." Fred Kaplan, from his "No Way Out" analysis posted today at Slate.com

Tactical victories, strategic setbacks. Has Fred been reading this humble blog, which recently observed the same chasm between tactical and strategic outcomes in Iraq?

Kaplan begins his piece with the following note of despair: "This is a terribly grim thing to say, but there might be no solution to the problem of Iraq." He ends it with this even grimmer assessment: "The dismaying, frightening thing is how imponderably difficult it will be simply to avoid catastrophe."

It is indeed a grim prospect, but one which has been so apparent for so long that it is dismaying (to say the least) that this looming catastrophe has not moved front and center in Big Media's coverage. There is a willful and obdurate refusal of the media to acknowledge realities in Iraq. The New York Times, in a belated but unabashed acknowledgment of its delusion, only recently conceded the factual inaccuracy of its claim of a decline in U.S. casualties in Iraq following the June 29 sovereignty charade. Big Media's disgraceful abrogation of duty is the pillar upon which rests the Deserter's Big Lie - that we are fighting in Iraq to eradicate terrorism. We are fighting for one thing only: to occupy Iraq.