If all goes according to plan and schedule, by this time tomorrow night, most of the 130,000 American troops in Iraq should have safely withdrawn from Iraqi towns and cities to military operating bases, where they will be on call to provide support if and when needed.
The American pullback was agreed upon as part of a security accord—a Status of Forces Agreement—negotiated and agreed to last year by the Bush administration.
Under the Status of Forces Agreement, U.S. commanders must seek permission from Iraqi authorities to conduct operations, but American troops retain the right to conduct operations in self-defense.
According to the New York Times, Gen. Ray Odierno, the American commander in Iraq, said that Iraq’s military and police units are ready to operate on their own, ahead of Tuesday’s deadline for the withdrawal of American combat troops from the country’s cities and towns.
“I do believe they’re ready,” General Odierno said from Baghdad on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “They’ve been working towards this for a long time. And security remains good.”
Along with General Odierno, most Americans hope that this this plan, worked out under the previous administration, including vice president Cheney, will be successful.
Or do we?
On June 4, in “Is the G.O.P. ‘Almost Rooting for a Terrorist Attack on Obama’s Watch’”? I defended Mr. Cheney and the G.O.P against an insinuation by columnist Frank Rich that a Cheney speech “with 20 mentions of 9/11, struck the same cynical note as the ads, as if the G.O.P. was almost rooting for a terrorist attack on Obama’s watch.”
About 10 days later, CIA Director Leon Panetta made the following comments about Cheney during an interview for a June 22 issue of The New Yorker:
I think [Cheney] smells some blood in the water on the national-security issue. It’s almost, a little bit, gallows politics. When you read behind it, it’s almost as if he’s wishing that this country would be attacked again, in order to make his point. I think that’s dangerous politics.
In a June 15 piece, I again defended Mr. Cheney:
While I do think that Cheney is lying, fear mongering and trying to rewrite history, I would not go as far as to say that he and the G.O.P. are rooting or wishing for another attack on our country.
And I added my reason for defending Cheney:
As we remember all too well, Democrats who opposed the war in Iraq, were shamelessly and ceaselessly accused by the Bush administration and its followers of not supporting the troops and, worse, of wanting America to fail—to lose the war. We must not ourselves stoop to such levels now.
Just as Americans would never wish their country to fail militarily for political purposes, I do not believe Americans—even Dick Cheney—would “root” or “wish” for another terrorist attack…just to make a political point.
Later, a CIA spokesman “clarified” and downplayed Director Leon Panetta’s comments.
Today, on the eve of the pullback of U.S. troops from Iraqi towns and cities, as agreed by Mr. Cheney’s president, Cheney expresses concern about such pullbacks, as reported by the Washington Times: “But what [Odierno] says concerns me: That there is still a continuing problem. One might speculate that insurgents are waiting as soon as they get an opportunity to launch more attacks.” And, “I would not want to see us waste all the tremendous sacrifice that’s gotten us to this point”
In April 2008, Cheney made the claim that al Qaeda would “acquire control” of Iraq’s oil resources if the U.S. left. He has also compared withdrawal to “betrayal.”
Tonight on Fox’s The O’Reilly Factor, O’Reilly’s stand-in made a comment to the effect that we owe the success in Iraq up to this point, and the fact that we are able to withdraw, to president Bush.
Fair enough.
However, if, God forbid, Cheney’s dark fears materialize, it will be interesting to see if he gloats “I told you so,” and, more important, where he will lay the blame.
I am getting a little tired of defending you, Sir.
