War: Iraq a stopgap for Afganstn-Pakstn's enhanced Taliban, Paul Rogers' defeatist swipe at Gen. Petraeus

Paul Rogers constructs the "two wars" into one, the Afghan war, regarding which the non-NATO coalition's efforts in Iraq was only a diversion and rearguard action. No matter that the war in Iraq was older and was against genocide, against the ending of which genocide the Weapons of Mass Destruction argument only served as a supplemental (recall Obama's coy rhetoric claiming the USA had no reason to be engaged in hostilities in Iraq, whereas the genocide in Darfur must be stopped by the USA and its allies). Rogers is hanging a lot of rthetoric, as did Obama, on a capricious hypothesis. So what if there were no WMD's awaiting our invading troops in Iraq; Saddam's genocidal regime had to go.

Now, there are two democracies of sorts functioning in the Muslim Mideast (counting Afghanstn in that designation, at least for the moment).

Of course, two new flawed Mideast democracies later, Rogers is correct that now there is one war. But, having come to share at least implicitly this element of the Petraeus Doctrine of one war, Rogers neglects to give a good accounting of changes in the scope of this now vastly militarized regional conflict in the Mideast. Changes: not only is the Taliban augmented in Pakistan (where, we add that a third democracy has been renewed after the sloughing-off of military dictator Musharraf), but that augmented and enhanced Taliban coalition with tribal/clan entities in Pakstn regularly crosses the border into Afghnstn with considerable impunity. Petraeus is presentlly taking action against the Taliban's power in both countries (while still he is coordinatively active in the third country, Iraq where apparrently Al Qaida has lost its grip).

Paul Rogers (Open Democracy, Nov20,2k8, click the title link) is an old hand at obfuscating in the service of defeatism. President-Elect Barack Obama would do well to dialogue closely, first of all, with Gen. David Petraeus.