ThinkProgress Logo

Security

VIDEO: Bush Agrees Current Iraq Violence May Be ‘Jihadist Equivalent Of The Tet Offensive’

In an interview today with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, President Bush said he agreed with a recent op-ed arguing that the current spike of violence in Iraq could be the “jihadist equivalent” of the 1968 Tet Offensive in Vietnam, which was “widely credited with eroding support for President Johnson” and turning the American public against that war.

Watch it:

[flv http://video.thinkprogress.org/2006/10/bushtet.320.240.flv]

President Bush is right to finally admit that violence in Iraq has reached a tipping point, and that the U.S. is not winning the war as he has claimed. But the current violence is not a propaganda campaign by Iraqis to impact the U.S. elections, as he suggests. It is a civil war, one that he has repeatedly failed to acknowledge and has no plan to address.

Digg It!

Full transcript: Read more

Iraq: Worse Than Civil War

For the last few months, top Bush administration officials have refused to admit that Iraq is currently in a civil war — disagreeing with many of Iraq’s leaders, U.S. troops in Iraq, and seven in ten Americans.

Recent estimates of Iraqis killed over the last three and a half years have ranged from 40,000 to more than half a million.

The simple fact of the matter is the situation in Iraq is worse than civil war — the world is witnessing at least four major internal conflicts in Iraq:

1) A Shiite-Sunni civil war in Baghdad and the central part of Iraq. For much of the last year, a vicious campaign of sectarian cleansing has been taking place in the neighborhoods of Baghdad and the surrounding central regions, with Shiite militias targeting Sunni Iraqis and Sunni insurgent groups bombing Shiite sites.

The Los Angeles Times reported yesterday that the latest killings this week in the central part of the country may be directly related to the lack of progress on the national reconciliation front. U.S. troops on the ground in Iraq have argued that the political solution, and not more boots on the ground, is the key to stopping the conflict: “you fix the government, you fix the problem.”

2) Intra-Shiite conflict in the south. Less noticed in the American media have been some battles between Iraqi Shiites in the streets of southern cities such as Diwaniya and Basra. In these clashes, intra-Shiite political disputes have being played out in violence in the streets — and in some cases U.S. forces have supported one faction versus another.

3) Sunni Arab insurgency in the West. The Sunni Arab insurgency continues to undermine security in the Western part of Iraq. The chief of intelligence for the Marine Corps in Iraq filed a report last month saying that the Al Qaeda in Iraq insurgent group has filled a political vacuum there.

4) Arab-Kurdish violence in the North. Violence and tensions have increased in northern Iraq between Arabs and Kurds, particularly in the disputed city of Kirkuk.

The Bush administration still does not have the right diplomatic, political or military strategy to deal with each of these multiple conflicts — all of which add up to a situation that is worse than civil war.

The United States needs to call for an immediate internal peace conference to put a stop to Iraq’s civil war, as the Center for American Progress proposes in its Strategic Redeployment plan.

Brian Katulis

Yglesias

Moral Clarity

Martin Peretz surveys the violence in Iraq, and discerns the cause — the country turns out to be full of Muslims. Meanwhile, in comments SkipChurch gets more explicit: “Has anyone calculated the rate at which Islamic sectarian violence will get the Muslim population down to a manageable number, like two dozen or so? Then maybe some sort of Right of Return deal can be worked out for those people in Dearborn, Israel, etc.”

Yglesias

Priorities, Again

I may say something about this at greater length later, but time grows short so for now let me simply note that the Bush administration today’s signed a policy committing the United States to unilateral hegemony over outer space. This seems like a fairly peripheral concern at the moment — there’s no pressing space-based threat. At the same time, one imagines that countries like Russia and China aren’t going to be thrilled with this idea. Coincidentally enough, right now we’re trying to secure a higher level of Russian and Chinese cooperation over North Korea, which is a fairly pressing issue. So was it really necessary to announce this just now? Does the White House even think about that kind of stuff — the idea that we should set priorities and try to avoid pissing people off over third-tier issues right when we’re potentially on the verge of accomplishing something important?

Yglesias

Stating the Obvious

John Quiggin notes that more of the British military’s top brass is speaking out about the ill consequences of the Bush/Blair Iraq invasion. This time, it’s Brigadier Ed Butler noting that Iraq has prevented Britain, the US, and our NATO allies from working effectively in Afghanistan. Rather than succeed at one mission, we’re now very much at risk of failing at two missions.

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up