Looking
for the hits you missed? Try
Recent
Rick for tons o' fun.
VINTAGE rick
It
was nearly unimaginable back then: Israelis and Palestinians
shaking hands on the White House lawn. It's even harder
to imagine now. Remember September of '93 in this Vintage
Rick!
NEW seasonal fave
Why
do they call it "traveling" if you're standing still?
And can't anyone do something about it? Get moving with
this Seasonal Fave!
And now, a “pause.”
Petraeus: Wait Awhile. Repeat as Necessary
By Rick Horowitz
I listened
to David Petraeus testifying about Iraq, and I found myself thinking
about storm sewers in Wisconsin.
One long-ago editorial about storm sewers in Wisconsin, to be precise
-- a fragment of which has become a minor star in the writing and editing
workshops I lead for journalists every now and again.
The particulars of this sewer system weren't what set my synapses alight
as I listened to Gen. Petraeus -- no cheap analogies to policies or
lives or dollars going down the drain. No, what made the connection
for me was the wording.
Lots of language, and not much information.
The storm-sewer editorial pondered the system's failure to do what it
was supposed to do when the rains came, and the various arguments pro
and con about whether the problem was with the sewer district's managers,
or with the system's original -- and now inadequate -- design.
And then the key
phrase:
"For
the most part, we tend to lean toward that viewpoint..."
In my workshops, I'd throw the words up there on the big screen and
open fire. "Talk about taking a stand!" I'd say. "Not 'We have
that viewpoint.' Not even 'We lean toward that viewpoint.'
But 'We tend to lean toward that viewpoint.'
"'For the most part.'"
It was language so thoroughly hedged, so totally conditioned, that it
practically disappeared right there on the page!
Which is exactly what I thought listening to David Petraeus talk about
when the troops might come home.
He was impressive, as he always is, offering his latest progress report.
Progress, absolutely, but also continuing peril. Positive signs, certainly,
but no lights at the end of tunnels.
And then the key sentences:
"After weighing these factors, I recommended to my chain of command
that we continue the drawdown of the surge combat forces and that, upon
the withdrawal of the last surge brigade combat team in July, we undertake
a 45-day period of consolidation and evaluation. At the end of that
period, we will commence a process of assessment to examine the conditions
on the ground and, over time, determine when we can make recommendations
for further reductions."
So when do more troops come home? When -- after the last surge brigade
combat team leaves in July, that is -- might other troops be drawn down?
Well, it won't be for at least 45 days after whatever date in July starts
the clock running -- we know that. And then?
Not yet. When the 45 days of "consolidation and evaluation" are over,
"We will commence a process of assessment..."
And what will the "process of assessment" do? The "process of assessment"
will "examine conditions on the ground."
Fair enough. You don't want to pull troops out without examining "conditions
on the ground." And then? Then can they come home?
Not yet. The general and his staff will not only examine "conditions
on the ground," but -- "over time" -- they'll "determine
when" they can make "recommendations for
further reductions."
Enough steps in there? And after those first 45 days, there isn't a
time certain attached to a single one of them.
Which may be the perfectly prudent course of action (or inaction): further
reductions as -- but only as -- conditions permit. Although you're free
to wonder whether the people at the very top of this chain of command
will ever admit that conditions permit. Our current commander
in chief is much better at stubbornness than he is at strategery.
Here's what will happen, says David Petraeus.
Don't hold your breath, say David Petraeus's words.
Posted 4/10/08. For
award-winning commentary, click to “Rick’s”-- and spread the word!
Rick Horowitz
