The president will give another big speech on Iraq tomorrow, and in the run-up the White House will unveil its "National Strategy for Victory in Iraq."
The timing couldn't be better: The release of the National Strategy for Victory comes two years and nine months after the war began and just two years and seven months after the president declared that the United States and its allies had "prevailed" in the "battle of Iraq."
As Think Progress notes, it might not have been such a bad idea to have a National Strategy for Victory before the war started. But the Bush administration did, sort of. It seems pretty clear that the new National Strategy for Victory is the same as the old National Strategy for Quagmire that the administration has been following all along. Earlier today, Scott McClellan -- he's back! -- said that the new National Strategy is an "unclassified version of the plan that we have had in place and the plan that we've been pursuing."
Asked whether anyone will be "shocked" by the contents of the National Strategy for Victory, McClellan talked around an answer that seemed to be no: "I think one purpose of providing this document is so that the American people can have a clear sense of our strategy for success in Iraq, and so that they can see how we look at the enemy, the nature of the enemy that we're facing and they can see how we define success in Iraq and how we are going about achieving victory in Iraq. And that's an important thing for the American people to be able to look at and understand."
Translated, we're pretty sure that means "9/11, 9/11, making progress, 9/11, Iraqi security forces, 9/11." But don't just take our word for it. You can ask Joe Lieberman.