Jules Crittenden (via Instapundit) sees us at a crossroads right now (as in this week!).
I can’t say I disagree with him and his post is good. I just see that a lot of decisions that are made end up changing rather quickly due to politics. If we go with a surge, I hope that Bush has his stubborness back because people are going to complain. Actually half the people will complain now and another 25% will complain soon. We need to be stronger than that.
(UPDATE: Jules is a guy (see comments). Whoops Sorry about that! I’ve switched pronouns in this post to update!)
Thanks for the gentle note Mr. Crittenden!
Mark Steyn thinks he has connected the two. I didn’t catch on to his round up but he’s always entertaining.
Omar sees changes occuring in Baghdad and is hoping for the best.
This time it looks like the plan will perhaps be somewhat different, at least in its political side because there’s a need and an apparent will to avoid the mistakes that surrounded previous plans as can be told from Maliki’s words yesterday. He sent, or resent, a few tough-worded messages including:
-Political factions will not interfere with the implementation of the plan
-ALL outlaw groups bearing arms will be dealt with in the same manner
-Protecting the populace is the job of the official armed forces and not the job of militias
I’m not sure if this is part of our “surge” but with or without an increase in troops it sounds like there are some changes going on there.
OpFor notes the Israeli nuclear threat to Iran.
Powerline today notes that Brian Calumne has finally issued a correction to a story I never mentioned. (On a story of El Salvador’s antiabortion policy, the times noted a woman who was sentanced to 30 years in prison for having an abortion. In reality that woman was sentanced for killing her newborn baby.)
The Times finally looked at the record and added a correction.