Okay, so maybe it really isn't a question, maybe it is just a fact. A story in Saturday's New York Times shows the cynicism of the Bush Administration. They have been having their allies in Congress and in the media complain that Democrats weren't giving Bubble-Boy's "surge", aka escalation, a chance. Well, it turns out that they don't expect any progress for months.
This is from the article: "The Bush administration will not try to assess whether the troop increase in Iraq is producing signs of political progress or greater security until September, and many of Mr. Bush’s top advisers now anticipate that any gains by then will be limited, according to senior administration officials."
September? Does this mean that our glorious leader's "surge" is going to last for several months? Yep. Here's another quote: "In interviews over the past week, the officials made clear that the White House is gradually scaling back its expectations for the government of Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki. The timelines they are now discussing suggest that the White House may maintain the increased numbers of American troops in Iraq well into next year."
Next year? Wait a minute, isn't that 2008, a presidential election year? What happens to our troops in the meantime? Check this out: "That prospect would entail a dramatically longer commitment of frontline troops, patrolling the most dangerous neighborhoods of Baghdad, than the one envisioned in legislation that passed the House and Senate this week."
So, here's what we got: a surge that isn't a surge since it is apparently a long-term commitment of more American troops. A president who won't tell us when we can expect American involvement to end in Iraq. A political party that plans to call anyone who disagrees with Bubble-Boy anti-American. In short, a receipe for more and more American casualities.
You can read the whole NYT article here.