Bush's Iraqi Cluster F*ck on hold until after US elections?

Thanks to Bill in DC


Spencer Ackerman asks AND PLAN B WOULD BE WHAT EXACTLY?. Well maybe that veritable icon of journalistic integrity Bob Novak has the answer.

Ackerman:

In essence, this plan boils down to throwing Iraqis into uniform and expecting them to hold the fiercest bases of the insurgency, after allowing the insurgents months to entrench themselves. At this point, with Falluja considering itself a symbol of resistance to the occupation, an assault on the city will likely radicalize almost every Fallujan--meaning that unless the town is wiped off the map, Hama-style, it will return, embittered, and take out its vengeance on vastly inferior Iraqi recruits who are just trying to earn a living in a climate of instability and massive unemployment.

So, kill as many people as necessary to make sure the election comes off in January. Then comes phase two.

Novak

Inside the Bush administration policymaking apparatus, there is strong feeling that U.S. troops must leave Iraq next year. This determination is not predicated on success in implanting Iraqi democracy and internal stability. Rather, the officials are saying: ready or not, here we go.

This prospective policy is based on Iraq's national elections in late January, but not on ending the insurgency or reaching a national political settlement. Getting out of Iraq would end the neo-conservative dream of building democracy in the Arab world. The U.S. would be content having saved the world from Saddam Hussein's quest for weapons of mass destruction.

So much for you broke it you own it I guess. The new Bush mantra, Saddam Hussein is gone so we won. It doesn't matter that Iraq will be thrown into a chaotic civil war and/or end up with a tyrant just as bad as Saddam, oops! they have one of those already. Of course none of this can happen until after the November elections.