The rumor is that early next week President Bush will present his revised war plan to the American people. From what I've heard, a major aspect of this plan is an increase in the number of US troops in Iraq. As far as that goes, it is a good thing. As I've said before, the primary benefit of such an increase is political - it lets everyone know that in spite of the results of the 2006 election, we're serious when we say we will continue to fight the war for victory. Democrats can yammer and talking heads can talk, but we're not looking for an "exit strategy", nor are we going to retreat using the focus-group-tested word, "redeploy". We're fighting to win. But we've also got the larger issue to deal with: Iran. Michael Ledeen gives us the picture of Iran's involvement in Iraq:
There is no escape from the war Iran is waging against us, the war that started in 1979 and is intensifying with every passing hour. We will shortly learn more about the documents we found accompanying the high-level Iranian terrorist leader we briefly arrested in Hakim’s compound in Baghdad some days ago, and what we will learn–what many key American officials have already learned–is stunning. At least to those who thought that Iran was “meddling” in Iraq, but refused to believe that it was total war, on a vast scale.
Several good journalists are working on this story (see, for example, today’s article by Eli Like in the NY Sun), and the outlines are pretty clear. First, we had good information that terrorists were in Baghdad, and had gone to the compound. We did not know exactly who they were. We entered the compound and arrested everybody who looked like a usual suspect. One of them told us he was the #3 official of the al Quds unit of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, a particularly vicious group. He was carrying documents, one of which was in essence a wiring diagram of Iranian operations in Iraq. That wiring diagram included both Shi’ite and Sunni terrorist groups, and was of such magnitude that American officials were flabbergasted. It seems that our misnamed Intelligence Community had grossly underestimated the sophistication and the enormity of the Iranian war campaign.
I am told that this information has reached the president, and that it is part of the body of information he is digesting in order to formulate his strategy for Iraq. If he sees clearly what is going on, he must realize that there can be no winning strategy for Iraq alone, since a lot of ‘Iraqi’ activity—not just lethal materiel such as the latest generation of explosive devices, now powerful enough to penetrate the armor of most of our vehicles—is actually Iranian in origin. We cannot ‘solve’ the Iraqi problem without regime change in Iran.
Iran's involvement in Iraq is an act of war against Iraq, the United States and all members of the Coalition. The case for war with Iran is as airtight as you can get without a "Pearl Harbor" sort of attack on the United States. Whether we wish to recognise the state of war which exists between the United States and Iran remains to be seen - one day we will have to face up to it, and we might as well face up to it now.
Those who have read this blog over the years know that I've long been opposed to military action against Iran. All through 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005 I counseled restraint, patience and diplomatic efforts. My hope was that the Iranian people - who are friendly to the United States, by all accounts - would take matters into their own hands and/or that genuinely moderate Iranian elements (and there are such in the Iranian power structure - although they are invariably not the people the MSM identify as moderates) would soften Iran's policy vis a vis the United States, Iraq and Israel. Restraint, patience, diplomacy and hope for a new Iran have proved ineffective - Iran's government is bent on a full scale war against the United States, and we need to deal with this harsh reality.
None of us know what President Bush will propose, but very seen (and, hopefully, by next week) we must start preparing the nation and our military for war with Iran. An increase in troop levels in Iraq serves the dual purpose of curbing the Iranian-sponsored terrorist violence, as well as providing larger striking forces in theater for any possible military action against Iran. I still hope we can avoid invading Iran - my preferred course of action is still blockade and bombing military sites, but it might prove necessary to push Iranian forces back from the Iran/Iraq border by 50 or 100 miles in order to provide a buffer against Iranian infiltration of Iraq.
One thing certain, the war is on - and the longer we wait to start fighting it, the worse it will be when we are finally forced into the battle.