Iraq Plan "A" Redux

Late last week I noticed that some generals were going public with the idea that securing Iraq might take a little longer than the talk about the surge indicated — like maybe two years. This, obviously, was not the best news, but it indicated experienced opinion rather than an operational plan.

Well, that plan exists. It is not a total surprise, and it especially makes sense that it would come out now since generals started suggesting this very same thing last week. Several times over the last few weeks we've heard Democrats say, over and over, that there is no purely military solution to Iraq. Usually this is discussed with the 2008 elections as a backdrop, but I don't think that makes it any less true. This plan, at least, was formulated by a top ambassador as well as a top military leader, although what the geopolitical value of that coordination might ultimately amount to remains to be seen.

The plan, according to the Times, doesn't specifically mention troop levels but does detail troop involvement in training Iraqi forces for what could possibly be a period that lasts through 2009. This may be a military version of a nod to reality, that the if the job doesn't involve a complete pullout, it will be long and difficult. I can't help but think, though, that these kinds of plan originate from the top, and come without much consideration for the will of the public or the Congress.

Some new polls show that despite low poll numbers for both Congress and President Bush, the public heavily favors Democratic leadership on the war. Which in turn tells you something about how they feel about Bush's regard for their opinion to begin with.