Could We Just Call It The Michael Gordon Times?

Well, I'm gobsmacked. This is a simply wonderful article from where else? The New York Times.

Okay, Michael Gordon wrote it, so my gob is only partially smacked. He's been consistently high-quality on all things Iraq. Let me point out a few highlights:

- "There is no question that the American reinforcements dispatched by President Bush have helped reduce sectarian violence, both directly through military operations and indirectly by helping encourage the spread of the Awakening movement, in which neighborhood watch groups have taken on Sunni extremists."

Well, it's in the Times now. Does that mean that the Lower-West-Side-types are going to give GWB and Petraeus credit? We all know the answer to that: probably not.

Will Senator Obama give them credit? Same answer? What does that say about our future president? That he's as stubbornly pig-headed as the Frank Rich crowd?

-Gordon is fair to both parties, highlighting strengths of each, but you can read through his restrained prose to see what he's saying here about Obama's troop-withdrawal plan:

"Mr. Obama’s position on troop cuts was forged in late 2006 as Iraq appeared to be approaching a full-scale civil war. Drawing on the bipartisan Iraq Study Group report, he opposed Mr. Bush’s troop reinforcement plan and sponsored legislation in January 2007 that would have removed all American combat brigades by the end of March 2008, while allowing a small force to remain for training, counterterrorism and the protection of the American Embassy and its personnel.

At that time, American intelligence agencies warned in a national intelligence estimate that the removal of all American and allied forces within 18 months would “almost certainly” lead to a significant increase in sectarian fighting, suggesting that the speedy, if partial, withdrawal advocated by Mr. Obama would also risk a major increase in violence."

Senator Obama, you were wrong on the surge strategy. Just say it. Spin it however you want, say that you're happy you were proved wrong, anything. This current head-in-the-sand tactic is asinine.

I'm actually warming to the guy. I'm not a right-winger who's convinced he's a closeted GayCommunistMuslim, I'm not going to wear "Nobama" t-shirts if he's elected. This refusal to admit the success of the surge, however, is the worst kind of partisan behavior.

- Gordon also manages to tease out some specifics from the Obama planned drawdown. Bottom line, his guys think it'll be somewhere between 30k and 55k.

- Here's a good summary quote of the politics of Iraq:

“The danger with Obama’s rigid timetable is that it may not allow U.S. commanders to react to events on the ground,” said Toby Dodge, a specialist on Iraq at the University of London and a former adviser to General Petraeus. “McCain’s policies lack the detail needed to confront the challenges of politics in Iraq. Policies developed to please the party faithful are not being subjected to close electoral scrutiny and do not match the complex political and military realties of Iraq.”

Very true, very true.