The revised US Iraq strategy is risky, at best. It ties the success of the operation and eventual withdraw of US troops to added responsibilities assumed by the Iraqi government.
From a project management 101 perspective, once a project falls behind, bodies added to the project have a diminishing rate of return. When we already have 120K soldiers in Iraq, why is an extra 20K the "secret sauce" that will eventually lead to withdrawl? In addition, we are relying on a roommate who never pays the rent on time, and looks in the other direction when you come home for the last Miller Lite in the fridge, and it is inexplicably gone. Your attempts to rectify the situation with your roommate have only amounted to a few conversations during 'My Name is Earl' where you told him to handle his business and quit being such a joke. Is that a plan for withdrawl at the end of the year, or a situation where your roommate continues to do nothing but continue to eat your food, drink your beer, and be alarmed and flummoxed when you tell him you plan on moving out at the end of the year?
With no clear objectives, a risky partner, and having waged a war against a guerrila enemy, with whom the US has no idea of their true nature or motivation, things going "according to plan" and the troop buildup succeeding is slight. When have things gone "according to plan" in Iraq yet?
No comments:
Post a Comment