The purpose of the surge was supposed to be to create opportunities for us to leave Iraq, not to stay there. Supporters of the surge have conveniently forgotten the political goal of the surge, and focused only on military success. Naturally, more American soldiers improve the military climate -- our soldiers do good work, but you cannot win an occupation. Our task in Iraq is political --no political progress has been made, the surge has not succeeded.
Every month we stay in Iraq takes $10 billion out of our treasury and lowers the value of the dollar. The lowered value of the dollar corresponds more with the increase in oil prices than any increase in demand or drop in supply. Every day we spend in Iraq, with the Iraqis asking us to leave, keeps us from addressing urgent issues at home, pursuing those who actually attacked us from Afghanistan, and drains our economy while hiking our gas prices.
Below the fold, McCain thinks Iran is looking at him funny.
Nothing more to say here, except I still wonder why no one has picked up on John McCain's statement:
"If Senator Obama had had his way, we'd have been out last March, and we'd been out in defeat and chaos, and probably had to come back again because of Iranian influence."
So, "Iranian influence" is sufficient reason to go to war against a country? I guess President McCain will be invading Syria and Lebanon, too, at the very least. It also looks as though he's an advocate of Cheney's 1% Doctrine -- "It's not about our analysis; it's about our response."
That certainly fits with McCain's gutcheck style: "I don't need no stinkin' analysis; I just need to know if we're being dissed. I don't need a real reason to go to war, I just have to be afraid of the way I think another country is looking at me. Are you looking at me, Iran? Are you looking at me?"