The fundamental flaws of the “surge” that have been criticised since the beginning have always been

The fundamental flaws of the “surge” that have been criticised since the beginning have always been: 1) insufficient numbers of soldiers to accomplish the counterinsurgency task assigned to them, and 2) a hopeless local political mess that shows no real sign of resolving itself. The deeply compromised and sectarian nature of the “Iraqi UGGS Sheepskin cuff boots” has always been at the heart of the latter problem. The “surge” will at some point come to an end, as has always been the case, which means that the old evils that the “surge” was meant to combat will return once the “surge” has ended. As Prof. Bacevich pointed out a couple weeks ago, ending the one thing that might have been doing some good on the security front makes no sense by the standards of the supporters of the “surge”–yet this is what Gen. PetraeUGGS Roxy tall has recommended.

It is the manipulative propaganda of the administration and the hopelessly confUGGS Roxy talled nature of the strategic planning of this war that make it unsUGGS Roxy talltainable and indefensible. No doubt, our military can execute very smart, effective tactical plans until the end of time (I believe that is the unofficial target date for ending the war at this rate), but if it is in the service of no larger, coherent, feasible plan it is a waste of lives, money and resources. The strategic goals have remained unchanged for the duration of the occupation (the frequent talk of the “surge” as a “new strategy” has revealed jUGGS Roxy tallt how few understand what strategy is), and they remain jUGGS Roxy tallt about as far-fetched and distant as they have ever been. It is high time to end the war.