Yet another from the over-stuffed cabinet of Iraq invasion and occupation "nobody could have anticipated" files. And another sign that all is not the rosy victory that the right would wish us to believe it is. (h/t Kat)

Marine Maj. Gen. John F. Kelly told The Associated Press that his greatest "mission failure" was his inability to bring together the government in Baghdad and the Sunnis in Anbar to take advantage of the steep decline in violence.

"What the Iraqi government in Baghdad should have done is said Anbar is getting peaceful, let's commit," Kelly told the AP in a telephone interview from his headquarters southwest of Baghdad, as he begins to make preparations to hand over command of 23,000 Marines next month to Maj. Gen. Richard T. Tyron.

"It drives me to distraction," he said. "I would count it as a mission failure."

Reconciliation? Meh, not so much. The many faction feuds and sectarian rivalries which helped make Iraq so bloody are still there, just tamped down for a while - hopefully long enough for the US to declare victory and (pretend to) withdraw. I'm mostly OK with that, since it's the Iraqi people's "pottery barn" and it should always have been their perogative to break it more or mend it as they see fit. I just wish the US government, politicians, militrary and mainstream media would be honest about it.

By the time it flares up again, US leaders appear to be hoping, those troops left in Iraq will be rebranded as trainers and securely inside fortified bases where they can get on with their original primary mission, as conceived by neo-whatevers from left and right, of being the US dog in the Gulf manger.

And I fully expect the Obama administration's strategy for Afghanistan to be doing exactly the same thing there.

How's this for spinning Bush's humiliating climbdown in accepting an Iraqi timetable for withdrawal and McCain's poor judgement in wanting a 100 year presence where the US isn't wanted? According to the WSJ's Yochi Dreazen says that Bush was right all along - the timetable can only happen because the Iraqis finally stood up so we can stand down! Wingnuts like the American Power blog are lapping it up. No mention at all of Bush's words from May, 2007:

It makes no sense to tell the enemy when you plan to start withdrawing. All the terrorists would have to do is mark their calendars and gather their strength -- and begin plotting how to overthrow the government and take control of the country of Iraq. I believe setting a deadline for withdrawal would demoralize the Iraqi people, would encourage killers across the broader Middle East, and send a signal that America will not keep its commitments. Setting a deadline for withdrawal is setting a date for failure -- and that would be irresponsible.

However, the Iraqi Army has no artillery, no airpower, no logistical capacity, no field hospitals and little else that a modern armed force needs. It's a glorified internal security paramilitary police force. And it has other problems too. Even Dreazen has to admit that:

Some U.S. officials warn that the army also is still vulnerable to internal sectarian tensions. Baghdad recently ordered a Kurdish brigade operating in Diyala to move elsewhere, but the Kurds refused, saying they would only take orders from the semi-independent Kurdish government in northern Iraq.

So if the Iraqi Army are standing up, it is only a bit - and the important question is "who for?"

No, this timetable is all about Noor al-Napoleon believing his own hype and really thinking his Shiite and Kurdish factions can keep a lid on Kurds, Sunnis and the Sadrists long-term. It's unlikely to be true, but if Iraq is a free and sovereign nation then it should get to sort such questions out as it wishes to and on its own.

I can't figure out if he's doing this because he's too stupid to learn and educate himself or if he buys into the Rovian theory that if you stubbornly keep repeating something over and over that eventually, it's accepted as the truth. Either way, is that the kind of Commander-in-Chief we need after Bush?

Think Progress:

During today’s hearing with Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) questioned Petraeus on what he called “the major threat” of al Qaeda in Iraq. In the wake of his recent confusion over the nature of al Qaeda, McCain today seemed to refer to al Qaeda as a “sect of Shi’ites”:

MCCAIN: Do you still view al Qaeda in Iraq as a major threat?

PETRAEUS: It is still a major threat, though it is certainly not as major a threat as it was say 15 months ago.

MCCAIN: Certainly not an obscure sect of the Shi’ites overall?

PETREAUS: No.

MCCAIN: Or Sunnis or anybody else.

It's really embarrassing that the guy who has built his whole campaign over staying in Iraq doesn't understand the players at all. Of course the media will never point this out, but it's ridiculous that he has made the same gaffe over and over again and can still be considered credible on National Security. As the Democratic Party blog said:

ThinkProgress also has it, and they flag down this quote: "Al Qaeda is profoundly Sunni. If a Shiite showed up at an al Qaeda club house, they’d slice off his head and use it for a soccer ball."

You can watch McCain's whole opening statement here.

Download | play Download | play (h/t Heather)

Sen. Lindsey Graham, newly back from his Iraq trip with BFF John McCain, appeared on Face The Nation to reiterate that really, the surge is working. No, I'm serious. It really has.

But the big picture for me is I’m incredibly pleased with the performance of our troops and Gen. Petraeus. On the political front, we’ve had the de-Ba’athification law passed. What does that mean? That means members of the Ba’ath party, who ruled the country under Saddam Hussein are now allowed to get some of their jobs back. That means the Shi’a and Kurds are saying to the Sunnis, ‘come back in and help us run the country.’ They passed a $48 billion budget, where every group in Iraq gets to share the oil resources. There was an amnesty law telling the prisoners in Iraq that we’re going to let some of you go…go back home, stop fighting, help build the new Iraq and most important of all we’re going to have provincial elections in October. The Sunnis boycotted the election in 2005, and everywhere I went in Anbar Province the Sunnis are ready to vote and be part of democracy.

Yup, that looks really rosy, doesn't it? As long as you don't follow the links.

Crooks and Liars celebrates the return to the blogosphere of Baghdad Burning. Much love and good wishes to Riverbend and family.

As we crossed the border and saw the last of the Iraqi flags, the tears began again. The car was silent except for the prattling of the driver who was telling us stories of escapades he had while crossing the border. I sneaked a look at my mother sitting beside me and her tears were flowing as well. There was simply nothing to say as we left Iraq. I wanted to sob, but I didn’t want to seem like a baby. I didn’t want the driver to think I was ungrateful for the chance to leave what had become a hellish place over the last four and a half years.

The Syrian border was almost equally packed, but the environment was more relaxed. People were getting out of their cars and stretching. Some of them recognized each other and waved or shared woeful stories or comments through the windows of the cars. Most importantly, we were all equal. Sunnis and Shia, Arabs and Kurds… we were all equal in front of the Syrian border personnel.

We were all refugees- rich or poor. And refugees all look the same- there’s a unique expression you’ll find on their faces- relief, mixed with sorrow, tinged with apprehension. The faces almost all look the same.

The first minutes after passing the border were overwhelming. Overwhelming relief and overwhelming sadness… How is it that only a stretch of several kilometers and maybe twenty minutes, so firmly segregates life from death?

The violent rhetoric from a whacked out Conservative. And there's plenty more where that came from...

J-Pod via Glenn Greenwald:

"What if the tactical mistake we made in Iraq was that we didn't kill enough Sunnis in the early going to intimidate them and make them so afraid of us they would go along with anything? Wasn't the survival of Sunni men between the ages of 15 and 35 the reason there was an insurgency and the basic cause of the sectarian violence no...read on"

Baghdad

Gunmen ambushed minibuses south of Baghdad on Saturday, killing at least 10 passengers and kidnapping about 50 others, police reported.

The abductions took place at around 7:30 p.m. (1630 GMT) nearly the highly volatile city of Latifiyah, said an officer who asked that his name not be used for fear of reprisals. Gunmen believed to be local Sunnis set up a false security checkpoint to stop the passengers, occupants of several minibuses. Latifiyah lies in the so-called Sunni Triangle of Death, about 30 kilometers (20 miles) south of Baghdad, where Shiites and U.S. and Iraqi security forces have been repeatedly targeted.