No Amount of Troops, No Amount of Time

Congress is interviewing the nominees for Chair and Vice-Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. And the answers that nominee Admiral Michael G. Mullen is giving are straight-forward and to the point, I believe. That is refreshing. I guess that King George can't keep firing generals forever.

In the first place, Mullen admits that our troops are "not unbreakable," and he believes that we need a "plan for an eventual drawdown" of troops. That probably sounds like heresy or treason to the rabid right, but there it is.

Senator Jack Reed, (D-R.I.), a former Army Ranger himself and critic of the administration's handling of the war, asked Mullen if his planned cap of tours of duty at 15 months, much less than what I'd heard the administration wanted, didn't force an end to the build-up in Iraq by April of next year "because we simply will not be able to put manpower on the ground unless we extend rotations." Mullen agreed.

When discussing troop morale, Mullen said "They believe in their mission . . . but there comes a point at which they're going to look at that and say, 'How much longer and for what price?' if progress isn't seen." Having been in the infantry myself, that's one of the most realistic statements I've heard yet.

There is clearly a conventional wisdom forming about this war. And it includes the view that "there is no purely military solution in Iraq." The politics of the war--the Iraqi politics--are seeming clearer and clearer with time. Mullen says that Iraq's leaders "need to view politics and democracy as more than just majority rule, winner-take-all, or a zero-sum game." And they need to take advantage of the "breathing space" that we're providing them at this time. If they don't, Mullen concludes, "no amount of troops in no amount of time will make much of a difference."

I think that we should take seriously Mullen's warning that Iran is posing a greater threat over time, but this mustn't be used as a pretext for spreading the war. We must contain Iran, as we should have done with Iraq. Iran, he says, is not only supporting the Shiites in Iraq, but is also supporting the Taliban in Afghanistan, sending them the powerful roadside bombs that have been so effective in Iraq.

Finally, Mullen listed the 7 "most significant mistakes" that were made by the U.S. in Iraq, including these 5:

1. We didn't "fully integrate all elements of U.S. national power in Iraq."

2. We didn't "establish an early and significant dialogue with neighboring countries."

3. We attempted to occupy the country with "an insufficient force."

4. We were wrong to disband the Iraqi Army, which could have been useful after the war, and would have kept many of them from becoming renegades.

5. And the "de-Baathification" of the government went to far too fast.