I don't think Obama has said that surge didn't work when "work" is defined as meeting goals within Iraq. What he's said (and said to Patraeus's face) is that the surge did not support the overall picture of preventing terrorism and protecting American interests. Obama's argument is not that we can't win in Iraq or that the strategies currently employed in Iraq (now that Bush is bothering to listen to his generals) aren't effective. His argument is that Iraq is not the be all and end all of military priority and that our resources are better spent elsewhere. And those currently running things seem to be agreeing with that assessment as they've moved their best man, Patraeus, into a position where he is focusing on Afghanistan more than Iraq.
From accounts of his meeting with Patraeus:
Quote:
|
"You know, if I were in your shoes, I would be making the exact same argument," he began. "Your job is to succeed in Iraq on as favorable terms as we can get. But my job as a potential Commander in Chief is to view your counsel and interests through the prism of our overall national security." Obama talked about the deteriorating situation in Afghanistan, the financial costs of the occupation of Iraq, the stress it was putting on the military.
|
source