What Happened to this Guy?

Didn't Tom Friedman used to be a respected voice in Foreign Affairs? I guess he was always hawkish, though - and late to renounce the war ... maybe that accounts for his McCain apologetics. (Or is he still sour about HRC?). I could pick apart some of his assumptions (some right, some wrong) - but generally I'm not convinced the surge was a strategic victory. Everyone is confusing strategic and tactical goals. The surge was a tactical victory (and I was in favor of the surge) where we couldn't afford to stay in Iraq or leave it - so we up'd our ante. The strategic goal was always to get some sort of political reconciliation and enough stability in order to leave. The surge helped with that some. But we have to credit the pre-surge Sunni Awakening (which is it's own double-edged sword), the pressure our threat of leaving/a new president put on Iraq's leaders, and internal Iraqi politics (everyone trying to bash the U.S. more than the next) have a lot to do with where we are strategically right now. Like I said, the surge helped - in Baghdad where it was focused ... but there are many other factors that contribute to our long-term success all over Iraq - and Obama was more right than he was wrong. I think it's unfair to paint McCain as a tragic figure at this juncture.

I thought Friedman would have avoided falling into the trap of viewing the surge in such simplistic - talkingpoint - terms.