Murtha: The surge is working but withdraw anyway.

Recently, US rep. John Murtha stunned his Democrat collegues when he said that the 'surge is working'. This prompted him to backtrack by saying that 'the war in Iraq cannot be won militarily' and again called for withdrawal. His colleagues were stunned because he had predicted the failure of the surge and is a prominent critic of Bush's Iraq war. This also came at a bad time when Democrat House Leader is trying to pass a war funding bill tied to a withdrawal time-table. I bet Nancy Pelosi is mad at Murtha.

Of course, Murtha did not explain why it cannot be won militarily when the surge is working. If the surge is working then it follows that the US military is winning. Withdrawal would of course give up the gains made and make a mockery of the sacrifices made by US servicemen and women. It would be like calling for withdrawal after winning the Battle of the Bulge and letting Hitler rule Europe.

What is going on here? Of relevence to this site is how the democratic process impacts decision and policy making. The votrepreneurs (politicians) are not interested in the welfare of the people they claim to represent. What they want is to win next year's elections so that they can keep their jobs.

What this means for the Democrats is that they must discredit the Bush administration. To do that, they must convince voters that the war in Iraq is a failure. Murtha had earlier told his supporters that the surge was not working and predicted a military disaster. Failure in Iraq, which is bad for America, is good for the Democratic Party.



The success of the surge corelates inversely with the number of votes Democrats will get. That's the key to understanding Murtha's flip flop comments on the surge.




His statement that the suge is working undermines House Leader, Nancy Pelosi, who is blocking funding for next year's combat operations unless Bush gives a time-table for withdrawal.

That is why Murtha backtracked even though premature withdrawal would mean disaster for both the Iraqis and the American people. Iraq would be plunged into Civil War. Al Qaeda, who had been chased out of Anbar province will make a comeback. Iran will take the opportunity to fill the vacuum and try to establish a Shiite style Islamic state.

This will be opposed by Saudi Arabia and other Sunni states who will then support Iraq's Sunnis. Whoever wins will establish a Taliban style government in Iraq, hostile to the US. Meanwhile, oil prices will go even higher because of the instability.

Of course, Pelosi and company cannot see so far ahead. For them, the next elections are all that matters. It took 12 years for the British to win the Malayan Emergency in Malaya against the Communists and this war in Iraq is comparable.

The war in Iraq is a clash of two ideologies. The US wants to install a western style democracy. Its opponents Al Qaeda in Iraq (Sunnis) and the Shiite Iranian regime wants Iraq to become an Islamic state with Shariah Laws. It is clear that US troops must stay for a long time to prevent the emergence of another Taliban state In Iraq (whether Shiite or Sunni style).

Unfortunately, democracies are not good for long term planning when votrepreneurs have to face elections every four years.