From his air-conditioned palace in Baghdad, American Pro-Consul-in-Residence for Iraq gave out some interviews over the weekend where he said:
"We're certainly not panicked," he said in an interview with several newspapers tonight, one of several meetings he had with news outlets over the weekend. "We're not going to get deflected from our direction by an attack now and then, tragic as it may be."
The attacks "are a sign of weakness," he said of those responsible for them, adding, "And I think we have to anticipate that as we succeed, we will continue to see attacks, and indeed you may find an escalation to terrorism as we go forward."
Yeah, I'm getting that point: The attacks are a sign of weakness. I notice that you don't see Viceroy Bremer outside very much, and when you do he's got about a bazillion security guys with lapel-mikes and Uzi's stuffed under their jackets. Not too many shots of him out and about with, say the 3ID or the troopers who are getting the love and affection by arresting 15 year-olds. In the comments over at Kos a week or so ago, Tacitus pointed out that the VC did not 'win' the war in Vietnam; that the programs we instituted to eliminate the VC put them out of business. He was correct, and the war was eventually won by the regulars of the North. But the part the VC played in the long term was significant and deadly. I have to wonder if the Iraqi's have not studied the 'lessons' of Southeast Asia and picked through to find "what works". If they learn from history and we don't then we are truly arrogant. It seems that might be the case.
You have to wonder, how could we have been down this path once before in Southeast Asia and be so willing to see ourselves set our feet on it again. None of the Neo-Cons at the AEI or in the administration who so desperately wanted this war are there fighting it, and I'm betting with the exception of Anthony Principi of the VA, not a single one has a child within 1,000 miles, hell 6,000 miles of Iraqi soil.
