AN OBAMA STRADDLE ON IRAQ? Straddle now, pivot later! I tried to check the Google Cache of his site, but, interestingly, his site doesn’t cache in Google. How convenient. Anyway, here’s an earlier page, in which he stakes everything on the Iraq Study Group plan, which would have been a disaster, instead of the surge, which has succeeded.

It’s all about judgment!


Obama spokesmen now say everyone knew that President Bush’s troop surge would create more security. This is blatantly false. Obama said in early 2007 that nothing in the surge plan would “make a significant dent in the sectarian violence,” and the new strategy would “not prove to be one that changes the dynamics significantly.” He referred to the surge derisively as “baby-sit(ting) a civil war.”

Now that the civil war has all but ended, he wants to claim retroactive clairvoyance. In a New York Times op-ed laying out his position, Obama credits the heroism of our troops and new tactics with bringing down the violence. Our troops have always been heroic; what made the difference was the surge strategy that Obama lacked the military judgment — or political courage — to support.

It was the audacity of hopelessness, and it was a miserable failure. He’s counting on the press to make sure nobody notices.