National Review Gives Two Cheers For Iraq Withdrawal
Speaking of dogs that haven’t barked about Obama’s Iraq withdrawal, National Review editorializes cautiously in favor of the plan. Once editor Rich Lowry called
Jul 31, 202025.5K Shares2.5M Views
Speaking of dogs that haven’t barked about Obama’s Iraq withdrawal, National Review editorializes cautiously in favor of the plan. Once editor Rich Lowry called the Democrats “the party of defeat”for embracing timetables for withdrawal; now his magazine is implicitly accepting a defeat of its own:
“„Obama has said all along that he would listen to his commanders on the ground, and that’s apparently what he’s done, tailoring his preferred policy to address their concerns. The draw-down contemplated next year is probably still too rapid, but the plan is not irresponsible on its face.
The magazine doesn’t say whyit thinks the draw-down is too rapid, but presumably it couldn’t run an editorial offering full-fledged support to a Democratic president. This is the route the editorial takes to square the circle:
“„Obama outlined a scheme for withdrawal not that different from the one George W. Bush left him. With the war ebbing in Iraq, it was inevitable that our force levels would come down.
Wrong on both counts. Obama did not inherit a “scheme” for withdrawal. What he inherited was a Status of Forces Agreement with a withdrawal timetable that Bush was outflanked by the Iraqis into accepting. Bush deserves credit for bowing to that reality, but the fact that the SOFA included a timetable at Iraqi insistence was most certainly not what he wanted. It did not include any formula for drawing down troops before 2011. Nor was it in fact “inevitable” that troop levels would in fact come down: had John McCain been elected president, he could have followed through on his campaign rhetoric and sought to revise the SOFA. Instead, he flip-flopped.
From Obama’s perspective — and the antiwar movement’s perspective — whatever path conservatives need to take to embrace withdrawal is welcome. The important thing is that conservatives who for years said that a timetable-based withdrawal would be a disaster have acquiesced to the left’s position.
Camilo Wood
Reviewer
Camilo Wood has over two decades of experience as a writer and journalist, specializing in finance and economics. With a degree in Economics and a background in financial research and analysis, Camilo brings a wealth of knowledge and expertise to his writing.
Throughout his career, Camilo has contributed to numerous publications, covering a wide range of topics such as global economic trends, investment strategies, and market analysis. His articles are recognized for their insightful analysis and clear explanations, making complex financial concepts accessible to readers.
Camilo's experience includes working in roles related to financial reporting, analysis, and commentary, allowing him to provide readers with accurate and trustworthy information. His dedication to journalistic integrity and commitment to delivering high-quality content make him a trusted voice in the fields of finance and journalism.
Latest Articles
Popular Articles