Petraeus on Iraq: Surges Take Time

For months we have been waiting with anticipation for General David Petraeus's testimony on Iraq. Would he tell us that the surge, a plan that he was one of the principal architects of, was a failure or a brilliant success? No one had any idea what his verdict would be on how good a job he has been doing at executing his own plan. Yesterday, in testimony in front of a congressional committee and in an exclusive interview on Fox News, Petraeus finally gave us his objective analysis. The surge, he said unexpectedly, has been a surprising success and he praised the progress he has made in Iraq.

Despite the fact that he would know better than anyone how the surge was working, since he was directly responsible for carrying it out, Democrats were scrambling to try to discredit him. They pointed to a report from the very biased nonpartisan General Accounting Office that contradicted his testimony that there was progress in Iraq. And they expressed impatience that the surge wasn't working fast enough.

But surges take time, Petraeus pointed out. Did anyone really expect that the surge would bring a rapid improvement or a sudden onrush of success? Did anyone say that the surge would be quick, moving like advancing waves or an unexpected increase in electric current? Surges, of course, don't work that way, as every Democrat should know. Surges need to be given time to grow before we know if they are effective. It might be five to ten years before the surge has run its course and we know if it has ultimately achieved its goals. The alternative, as Petraeus warned, is to be "rushing to failure" in Iraq.

The ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker, reiterated Petraeus's points and tried to explain to Democrats how surges work. "The process will not be quick," he said. "It will be uneven, punctuated by setbacks as well as achievements, and it will require substantial U.S. resolve and commitment. There will be no single moment at which we can claim victory; any turning point will likely only be recognized in retrospect."

Democrats seem to think that a surge just happens overnight. In fact, the surge has barely begun. As President Bush pointed out last month, the surge didn't actually begin when he announced it back in January. It really started in August and is still in its "early stages." Since then it has been building slowly with deliberate speed. In fact, the surge might not even really get going until Bush is out of office or until he is dead. How can anyone claim the surge has failed when it is just getting started?

Apparently, Democrats believe that the only way they can score political points is to redefine the terms of the debate by constantly moving the goal posts or even rewriting the dictionary and changing the definition of surge. Nothing the impotent and impatient Democrats say or do is going to convince the President or General Petraeus to force the surge to work more rapidly or to cut it off prematurely. The surge is going to take years and years to finish surging and Democrats are just going to have to be patient.

Share This Post



Technorati Tags: Jon Swift, David Petraeus, Ryan Crocker, Surge, Iraq, Politics