Al Qaeda Militants

I'm sure you are noticing that all the news of the war effort in Iraq has been focused on pursuing "al Qaeda" militants. Aside from the obvious steno pad tendencies of the media to simply write what they are spoonfed by the Pentagon, why is this happening?

I have a theory. The U.S. is making Iraq a us vs. them situation with the "us" being the U.S., Iraq Sunnis, and Shias vs. "them" who are "foreign" fighters. It suits the politics of the situation to continue to oversue the term "al Qaeda" for both domestic consumption and to create the espirit de' corps that they hope for among the Iraqi's.

But what happens if they're wrong? Suppose they're not really fighting "al Qaeda" or even fundamentalists? Remember Chalabi who adeptly used the U.S. military to get rid of Saddam for him? Why is it not possible that the U.S. has become a pawn, being used by Sunni's to rid themselves of those radicals in their midst just like Shiites have used the U.S. military to fight against Sunnis?

I can see a couple of serious flaws in the current offensive. First we're arming, training and supporting Sunnis who ultimately will fight against the government. Second, whoever we are fighting is a popular insurgency that is indistinguishable from civilians. Any fighting will inevitably kill lots of innocents, fueling the insurgency as they continue the old George Washington tactic of a) stand and fight to inflict costs and casualties, b) withdraw in the face of overwhelming force, c) regroup in other areas with support from the population, d) repeat until the occupier tires.

Without a political solution that includes popular Sunni support for a national government, the war will continue.

Update: That didn't take long. About twenty minutes after writing the above, I ran across this:

BAGHDAD, June 22 — The operational commander of troops battling to drive fighters with Al Qaeda from Baquba said Friday that 80 percent of the top Qaeda leaders in the city fled before the American-led offensive began earlier this week. He compared their flight with the escape of Qaeda leaders from Falluja ahead of an American offensive that recaptured that city in 2004.

In an otherwise upbeat assessment, Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, the second-ranking American commander in Iraq, told reporters that leaders of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia had been alerted to the Baquba offensive by widespread public discussion of the American plan to clear the city before the attack began. He portrayed the Qaeda leaders’ escape as cowardice, saying that “when the fight comes, they leave,” abandoning “midlevel” Qaeda leaders and fighters to face the might of American troops — just, he said, as they did in Falluja.

Oh and Falluja was such a resounding success.

But.

Wait wait wait. I'm confused. I thought we had them surrounded? LMAO. What are the guerillas (I refuse to categorize them as al Qaeda because no one really knows who they are) supposed to do, fight like real men and die like at the Alamo? I'm sure they'll be very offended at having their masculinity challenged by the American general.

Can you believe this crap? Also note that tucked away in this article is an estimation that we outta have things under control by "next spring".

Update II: Digby:

The problem, of course, is that once you prove you are too muscle bound to move quickly and effectively, calling the other side "cowards" for failing to confront you actually is humiliating. And stupid. Your opponent just laughs while he runs circles around you.

...

Enough, already. These Republican grown-ups are all a bunch of emotionally damaged head cases. We are in desperate need of mature leadership.