Iraq surge reaction round-up

Iraq, circa 1970, from the inimitable General JC Christian.

Matt Yglesias sums up:

So to sum up, neither the American military nor the American congress nor the American people nor the Iraqi government nor the Iraqi public wants an American military escalation. Naturally, we're getting one.

Via Andrew Sullivan, John Derbyshire points to a tiny flaw in the President's otherwise airtight plan:

So-o-o-o:

—-We can't leave Iraq without a victory.

—-Unless Maliki & Co. get their act together, we can't achieve victory.

—-If Maliki & Co. don't get their act together, we'll leave.

It's been a while since I studied classical logic, but it seems to me that this syllogism leaks like a sieve.

Next comes news this morning that we have attacked the Iranian consulate in Northern Iraq and taken the employees prisoner. WTF?

And now we’re in the process of getting embroiled in a fight with a third insurgency and creating yet another refugee crisis in Somalia? Is this really happening?

Meanwhile, Steve Clemons takes note of some ominous rumors:

Washington intelligence, military and foreign policy circles are abuzz today with speculation that the President, yesterday or in recent days, sent a secret Executive Order to the Secretary of Defense and to the Director of the CIA to launch military operations against Syria and Iran.

Steve also quotes possible Republican presidential candidate Senator Hagel’s thoughts on the President’s speech:

I think this speech given last night by this president represents the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam, if it's carried out. I will resist it -- (interrupted by applause.)

As others have said better than I, indeed.

And finally, from Brad DeLong, does George Bush have the mental and emotional maturity of a 14 year old or of a 3 year old? The adolescent vs. toddler debate rages on.