Registan.net

Jari is definitely on the right track: Donald Rumsfeld, in his grand op-ed in the New York Times, argues that years of struggle were necessary in order for the surge to work:

From 2003 through 2006, United States military forces, under the leadership of Gen. John Abizaid and Gen. George Casey, inflicted huge losses on the Baathist and Qaeda leadership. Many thousands of insurgents, including the Qaeda chief in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, were captured or killed and proved difficult to replace.

In other words, he is recasting the narrative of the Iraq War to one in which he is brilliantly prescient, rather than pig-headed and venal.

But what’s best about his op-ed is he then valiantly questions whether or not troops alone will “solve” Afghanistan’s many problems—a question he himself denied the need to answer in 2002. From a man who seems to think wars will run themselves and “stuff happens,” this is a pretty stunning refusal to accept blame.

Thanks Rummy! I’m sure the new 20,000 troops surging through BAF/KAF over the next 18 months will deeply appreciate the bewildering array of multiple conflicting chains of command they’ll have to navigate.

Stumble it!