A Surge Strategy for the Surge Strategy

With the collapse of public support for the failed War in Iraq evident everywhere, it appears the administration is back to its tried and true tactic: increase the fear factor.

Their logic is clear: more fear = more war funding.

Consider what's transpired just this week:

- Yesterday, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said--without any evidence--that he has a gut feeling that Al Qaeda is about to act.
- Earlier we also saw news reports of Al Qaeda cells infiltrating into the U.S.
- And just today "U.S. counter terrorism analysts" leaked to the press that Al Qaeda is back to its pre-9/11 operating capabilities.

So while the propagandists are working over time to raise the public's fear quotient, the president went before the media to say: 1) Al Qaeda wants to kill us; 2) the surge is working; and 3) the surge is really only 3 weeks old; 4) we should wait for General David Petraeus' report in September before deciding to change anything; and 5) the Congress should just fund the war and stop trying to run.

W does concede that progress towards the agreed upon surge objectives Petraeus is to report upon in little over a month, is problematic. And that's exactly the rightwing radio and cable screechers will now in union commence turning up the pro-war volume, suggesting:

1) another 9/11 may be imminent
2) Al Qaeda cells have infiltrated through Mexico (hey, why not kick that dog one more time) and they're carrying Soviet suitcases
3) the surge is working
4) and anti-war Democrats and Republicans are unAmerican.

So that's the strategy. Raise the public's fear level with aid from the screechers and then brow beat the Congress to back off--and given the backbone of this congress and the MSM to fall silent at critical moments, it'll probably work.

Question: If Al Qaeda has regrouped in their mountain perch along the Pakistan and Afghanistan border, and it's from there that they're hooking up yet another devastating attack on America's homeland, why is it that we have 160,000 troops, costing us $12 billion a month, in Iraq?