Barack Obama's A Series Of Fortunate eventsby Daniel ClarkTo hear Barack Obama tell it, America's success in Iraq is the result of aseries of unrelated accidents. In a July 21st interview with ABC's TerryMoran, the senator explained, "I did not anticipate . the convergence ofnot only the surge but the Sunni Awakening, in which a whole host of Sunnitribal leaders decide that they had had enough with al-Qaeda, in the Shiacommunity the militias standing down to some degrees. So what you had is acombination of political factors inside of Iraq that then came right atthe same time as terrific work by our troops. Had those political factorsnot occurred, I think that my assessment would have been correct."The assessment he's referring to is his prediction that the surge wouldbackfire, resulting in a dramatic increase in sectarian violence. Now hecontends that this still would have come true, if only theShiite-controlled government hadn't cracked down on Shiite gangsters, andSunni tribal leaders hadn't stood up to Sunni terrorists and joined thepolitical process. So you see, he has been proven almost right, except forthose couple of mere technicalities. In the words of another slenderfellow who was less brilliant than he thought, "Missed it by that much."He doesn't even entertain the notion that the sudden boldness on the partof the Iraqi government and the Sunni tribesmen is related in any way toPresident Bush's reaffirmation of America's commitment to see the jobthrough. Presumably, these were coincidental events that would haveoccurred even if the U.S. had abandoned Iraq, as Obama and his party haddemanded.Although John McCain was incorrect in stating that the surge precipitatedthe birth of the Sunni Awakening in Anbar, the fact remains that theAwakening movement was conceived by the tribal leaders as a cooperativeeffort between themselves and the U.S. military. When they held a pressconference declaring themselves to be a national party in April 2007 --three months after Bush announced the surge -- they presented themselvesas unambiguously and fervently pro-American. Any Senate Democrat ought toknow this, because it's the reason they immediately tried to douse theSunnis' enthusiasm, by having Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid declareIraq to be "lost."Obama's version of events suggests that if we'd left the innocent Sunnisto fight al-Qaeda on their own, they would have still survived, flourishedinto a national movement, and remained loyal to the United States all thesame. The fact that the president happened to pick this same time frame toorder the surge was simply an example of dumb luck.As for Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's willingness to confront theIranian-supported Mahdi Army, it can be pinpointed at the meeting Bush hadwith him, shortly after the release of an NSA memo raising doubts aboutthe PM's reliability. Another whimsical confluence of events, in the taleas told by Barack Obama.The senator seems to view events in Iraq as if he's watching an episode ofSeinfeld, in which the various plot lines are independent of each otheruntil they collide at the very end. Victory, his analysis suggests, ismore likely an incidental side-effect of one of Kramer's zany schemes thanthe result of deliberate decisions made by President Bush and hisgenerals.Obama's insistence that he was still right to oppose the surge, and favorimmediate withdrawal instead, tells us that his dissociation of cause andeffect relieves himself of responsibility, just as it denies credit toBush. If Obama becomes president, his decisions need not be restrained byconsideration of the consequences, because no negative consequence canpossibly have resulted from his decision. It will simply be anothercoincidental combination of factors, that happened at the same time thathis orders were being carried out.Democrats have been quick to jump on every real or perceived misstep inIraq, including every failure to predict our enemies' next move. Seldom dothey acknowledge, let alone praise, the perseverance and adaptability withwhich our military has overcome those obstacles. Now, they're about tonominate a presidential candidate who sees no point in adapting orpersevering. When things aren't going as planned, his answer is to justgive up and go home.Of course, that kind of decision-making would reinvigorate our terroristenemies, betray the trust of our allies, and demoralize the Americanpeople. The important thing, though, is that Obama could refuse to beblamed for it. After all, stuff happens.