Iraq

The always brilliant Seymour Hersh reports about the future conduct of the war. His answer: up in the air, with the United States scaling back its troop size and relying more on the air force with Iraqi units possibly selecting the targets. This policy has not been made public, and the administration continues to state that it has no plans to leave, but changes in our handling of the Iraq war must be implemented. And here's why.

Hersh writes:

There are grave concerns within the military about the capability of the U.S. Army to sustain two or three more years of combat in Iraq. Michael O’Hanlon, a specialist on military issues at the Brookings Institution, told me, “The people in the institutional Army feel they don’t have the luxury of deciding troop levels, or even participating in the debate. They’re planning on staying the course until 2009. I can’t believe the Army thinks that it will happen, because there’s no sustained drive to increase the size of the regular Army.” O’Hanlon noted that “if the President decides to stay the present course in Iraq some troops would be compelled to serve fourth and fifth tours of combat by 2007 and 2008, which could have serious consequences for morale and competency levels.”

Not having sufficient troops to secure the peace has led to disaster. The insurgents operate in many areas with impunity, and attacks against troops and civillians have surged. We fought the war on the cheap, and now we are paying the price.