Last Throes

[andyfox]

Dick Cheney last month said that the Iraq insurgency was in its "last throes."

Don Rumsfeld told the Senate Armed Services Committee, "I didn't use them [the words "last throes"] and I might not use them," saying the insurgency could "go on for four, eight, ten, twelve, fifteen years, whatever . . . We don't know."

Again today, Rumsfeld said it may take as long as twelve years to defeat Iraqi insurgents and that Iraqi security forces will finish the job because U.S. and foreign troops will have left the country.

That being the case, what is the problem with setting a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. forces? The administration has maintained that setting a timetable would embolden the insurgents. But if the insurgency is going to continue anyway, why not say when we're pulling out?

Rumsfeld said, "We're not going to win against the insurgency. The Iraqi people are going to win against the insurgency. That insurgency could go on for any number of years. Insurgencies tend to go on five, six, eight, ten, twelve years.

"Coalition forces, foreign forces are not going to repress that insurgency," he said on "Fox News Sunday."

Rumsfeld, in interviews on the Sunday news shows, warned that the insurgency could grow through the year as Iraqi leaders develop a constitution for a democratic government.

At the same time, Rumsfeld defended Vice President Dick Cheney's description of the insurgency as being in its "last throes." Rumsfeld said the U.S. commander in the Middle East did not contradict Cheney when he told the Senate last week that the insurgency was as strong as it was six months ago.

"If you look up 'last throes,' it can mean a violent last throe," Rumsfeld said on ABC's "This Week."

He must have a dictionary of which I am unaware.