While Bush's speech was
More-of-the-Same®, I think it is incumbent upon our Democratic leadership to debunk the perpetuation of two fundamental administration myths. These are the very myths (okay, blatant lies) Bush and his cohorts repeatedly cite:
A) to justify our continued presence in Iraq, and
B) as the primary yardstick for any potential draw down of U.S. troop strength.
Our men and women in Iraq are not served by the perpetuation of these falsehoods. Neither are the American people.
Read on for the two, key myths...
- Growing Iraqi military and police competency - Not true, and ignores the fact that troops who have been trained have proven to be more loyal to their religious and ethnic militias than to an Iraqi army or any local or regional police presence. We're training and arming militias for the ongoing civil war. Both Odom and Murtha confirm in coversations with U.S. commanders on the ground that Iraqi troops cannot be trusted in battle because of their allegiances. (See this diary for details.)
- Iraq is full of foreign fighters - Bush and company use this to underscore their fallacious claim that we are "fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them here." Note Bush's use of the word "terrorists" to describe what were formerly called "insurgents." The military's own intelligence assessment estimates that only 5% of insurgent fighters (not "terrorists") are foreign, according to a recent report in The New York Times. Murtha cited figures of "under 10%." (See this diary for details.)
Democrats need to debunk these bogus claims loudly and repeatedly. The claims are not supported by the reality on the ground in Iraq being reported by commanders below general level.
Our troops and the American people need (and deserve) to hear the unvarnished truth. And Democrats must offer that truth. Because it is obvious that Bush and company will not.
Update [2005-11-30 13:19:24 by Bob Johnson]:
Let me add that debunking these falsehoods does not preclude a withdrawal timetable. As Odom correctly points out, NATO, the UN and the Arab League do not want to step into our mess in Iraq as long as we remain in-country. These groups are only likely to act after we vacate the premises.
Thus, debunking these myths provides an alternative to the bogus "when the Iraqis stand up, we'll stand down" strategy Bushco continues to articulate. If we suggest that will never happen, then the alternative is to remove our forces so that NATO, the UN and perhaps the Arab League can implement a true, multi-national solution that involves us as a military component only marginally.