Surge and Accelerate - Getting Ready for the Debate

The semi-official leaks of the "New Way Forward in Iraq" are making their way through the morning news shows. While none of the information is a surprise, the media engines are beginning to rev in preparation for exhausting coverage of the official announcement scheduled for sometime next week.

So let's review ahead of the media blast.

According to the leaks the plan's central pillar is to boost troops numbers by 20,000. Also, reconstruction funding will be boosted. The "logic" of the plan is to accelerate the fight for security so that the Iraqi's can take over security roles sooner. The title of this new way forward? "Surge and Accelerate"

Ok, let's take this step by step:

-This plan is immensely unpopular: The American people are overwhelmingly against the idea of a surge. 56% Oppose, 11% Favor, %32 for the Status Quo. (Polling Report). The troops on the ground oppose this plan. For the first time, serving troops disapprove of the president's handling of the war. In terms of troop numbers, 39% favor current levels or lower while %22 favor a surge similar to Bush's plan. (Military Times Poll)(AP News).

-In terms of the reconstruction effort, where did Bush get the notion that more money is the answer. As has been amply demonstrated, the problem with the reconstruction to date has been corruption and a lack of security. (Washington Post)(BBC). Even giving Bush the benefit of the doubt about the outcome of the surge in terms of security, I will be eagerly awaiting details on where this new money will come from and how it will be handled differently from past reconstruction monies that have been squandered, wasted, or outright stolen. Also, while Congressional Democrats may be too timid to withhold funding from our troops, it is a relatively risk-free proposition to withhold funding from the proven money-pit that is the Iraqi Reconstruction.

-From a P.R. perspective, "Surge and Accelerate"? Really?! This is the best they can come up with? In a more serious vein, the time for new slogans has long been over. But apparently, P.R. and political concerns are paramount with the Administration. The New York Times had an interesting piece yesterday. Apparently, by mid-September the Administration could not deny what has been obvious to the rest of the world, namely that Iraq was spiraling out of control. They saw the need for a reassessment but would not say so publically before the elections. So, let me get this straight, the lives of our troops are less important that appearing steadfast?! (New York Times).

This just in, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki has announced that he will not seek a second term and that he "wishes his job was over"!! (Reuters).

Worst of all, this is the administration's best idea! No really, no other ideas. The American Enterpise Institute's Frederick Kagan told the Wall Street Journal yesterday.

"If we surge and it doesn't work, it's hard to imagine what we do after that. But we're already in a very bad spot, and if we don't do anything defeat is imminent."

All in all, I don't see more numbers making a difference. But it sure will be an interesting week.