Withdrawing from Reality

From the New York Times today:

WASHINGTON, May 25 — The Bush administration is developing what are described as concepts for reducing American combat forces in Iraq by as much as half next year, according to senior administration officials in the midst of the internal debate.

The Washington insiders talk, the press dutifully "reports." If this seems familiar, it's because it is.

The idea that there is any really serious consideration of a troop decrease or anything resembling a withdrawal is clearly piffle:

So far, the concepts are entirely a creation of Washington and have been developed without the involvement of the top commanders in Iraq, Gen. David H. Petraeus and Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, both of whom have been enthusiastic supporters of the troop increase.

Those generals and other commanders have made it clear that they are operating on a significantly slower clock than officials in Washington, who are eager for significant withdrawals before the president leaves office in January 2009.

In an interview in Baghdad on Thursday, General Odierno, the senior United States ground commander, said any withdrawal of American troops was not advisable until December, “at a minimum.”

There is no "debate" about troop sizes or withdrawals. They will remain as they are, or get higher, just as they have each time before when the administration "debated" the future of the war. Bush and gang have repeatedly claimed that withdrawal is a sign of weakness that would be disastrous for Americans, leading to an Army of Janissaries at the gates of Washington, or Hustisford, or wherever. Their opposition to all things Democrat is predicated on the idea that they are surrender monkeys that cannot be trusted. Each and every one of the Republican Presidential candidates (save one) are falling all over themselves to prove that THEY will be roughinest, toughinest, torturingest, biggest-cock-wieldingest Real-'Merican on the block. They have already committed themselves to more troops under the requests of more time. In essence, they have dug themselves in, on purpose, and there is simply no way they can reverse this position in any real sense, no matter what posturing might filter through the media.

This is part of a game. The Democrats caved on the funding battle. This will allow two things: The Republicans can pretend to talk about troop withdrawals now, in order to take at least partial credit for the inevitable troop cuts in the future; and it also buys them time, time they need to keep it going until they can wheeze to the finish line, where they will be able to blame the Democrats for losing after they are gone. And, just like the post-Vietnam era, they will play this up for all it's worth.

Especially with returning veterans. Spencer Ackerman's article, here, details a problem facing Democrats in the future: Veterans feelings about "losing" the war. As someone who feels the war was unnecessary and futile from the start, I see the policy makers, not the soldiers, marines, etc. as being at fault. But veterans will not see it this way. Being pulled (as they will see it) prematurely will most likely leave many of them feeling bitter. And the lowest and most manipulative of Republicans will be there to welcome them with open arms.