Blue Crab Boulevard

Worst Nightmare

After Nancy Pelosi and John "Unindicted Co-Conspirator" Murtha led a slim majority of the House Democrats (plus two Republicans) one pork chop too far with their supplementary spending bill, about the worst thing that could happen is for the surge to begin working in Iraq. Which it appears to be doing. Reports are coming in that the Iraqis are turning on al Qaeda. The progress is such that the media can't even ignore it.

By The Way, It’s Official …
… we can win in Iraq, we are winning in Iraq, and George Bush’s surge strategy is responsible for it. Not even the AP can ignore it* anymore:

The US military has captured the leaders of a car-bombing ring blamed for killing hundreds of Iraqis.

The news came as the departing US ambassador said Americans are in ongoing talks with insurgent representatives to try to persuade them to turn against al-Qaeda.

It is noteworthy, though the AP can’t quite bring itself to note it, that the anti-al-Qaeda Sunni insurgents have advanced beyond the Democratic congressional leadership in their thinking:

Khalilzad said the talks have shifted from “unreasonable demands” by the groups for a US withdrawal to forming an alliance against al-Qaeda. He said the effort has gained support among tribal leaders and even some insurgents.

“Iraqis are uniting against al-Qaeda,” he said.

The House Democratic leadership bet the farm on losing in Iraq. If they bet wrong, they are going to have some very tough sledding in the next election. They will have provided their opponents the club with which they will rightfully get beaten. It begins to look like they bet very badly indeed.

Politics, War | Gaius March 27, 2007

By M.A., March 27, 2007 @ 11:15 am

We’ve been hearing this “good news from Iraq” nonsense since the day we invaded, and it’s always wrong.

The main point here is the separation between those who are serious on national security and those who aren’t. If you’re serious about national security, like Pelosi or Murtha, you accept the fact that we cannot “win” in Iraq and look for a decent way out.

If you want America to be humiliated, as Bush does, then you want to stay in Iraq forever, and you make up stories about how we’re “winning” and spout idiotic myths about who we’re fighting (so conservative posts are full of talk about Al-Qaeda, ignoring the fact that Al-Qaeda is a minor factor in the Iraq violence).

So are you with the serious people who want a solution, or with Bush, who just wants more dead Americans and is willing to pretend that we can “win” Iraq’s civil war?
By crosspatch, March 27, 2007 @ 12:05 pm

“If they bet wrong, they are going to have some very tough sledding in the next election.”

And this is exactly why they *must* pass legislation that forces defeat in Iraq. A victory there is their worst nightmare. They said it was impossible, couldn’t be done. Now they are faced with the prospect that it can be done. Their only choice now is to scramble and do whatever they can to force defeat. This must end as a defeat for the US because the Democrats have framed it as George Bush’s personal war (notwithstanding that Congress voted with only ONE dissenting vote to start this). To the Democrats, Iraq is pure politics, nothing more. Frankly, the Democrats have become monsters.
By syn, March 27, 2007 @ 2:33 pm

Allow the world’s finest military to do the work they are best trained to do and amazing things happen.

Why can’t the Democrat Party see America as a force for good against evil and not the force of evil?
By Hurricane Shirley, March 27, 2007 @ 3:01 pm

I’ve been waiting for news like this. Thank you for finding it, Gaius.
By verplanck colvin, March 28, 2007 @ 6:08 am

Why do you say that the Sunnis hate the AQ forces like it’s some new development? This has been hinted at in 2005 and all the way back in 2004. If anything, we’re exacerbating the problem by providing a target for both groups (Sunni insurgents and foreign AQ fighters), instead of letting each other fight it out among themselves.