« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Today's Must Read
When Gen. David Petraeus made his big trip to Congress last September, he came armed with a full deck of slides. But none of them captured the U.S. strategy in Iraq quite like this one:
In it, you can see a neat illustration of how we’re going to eventually get out of Iraq. By July, as you can see above, the U.S. force level will return to the approximate size it was preceding the surge. After that, well... the question marks begin.
According to the chart, the date for the subsequent drawdown was to be determined this month (the "decision point"). But it won't be, The Washington Post and New York Times report this morning.
When Petraeus returns to Congress in a couple weeks for his next big briefing, he will give a good idea of how many U.S. troops will remain in Iraq as of July. But beyond that, nothing. From the Times:
During the briefing to the president, General Petraeus laid out a number of potential options, the officials said, but avoided using the term “pause.” That word has gained traction here in Washington over recent weeks to describe the plateau in troop levels that is widely expected to last through the fall elections and perhaps beyond.Instead, he described the weeks after the departure of the extra brigades ordered to Iraq in January 2007 as a period of “consolidation and evaluation,” a phrase first used publicly by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates during a visit to Iraq in February.
The officials said that Mr. Bush and General Petraeus, recognizing public and Congressional wariness about the toll of the war, would publicly hold out the possibly of withdrawing more troops, but only if conditions allowed it. Mr. Bush, in particular, is eager to end his presidency with the appearance that things are getting better in Iraq.
The Times concludes that "it now appears likely that any decision on major reductions in American troops from Iraq will be left to the next president." A state of affairs that should surprise no one, as the administration has ably kicked the can down the road with promises of dramatic improvement just six months away. Perhaps the only happy development from all this is that the administration has decided to chuck the farcical six month reviews and instead concentrate on a smaller review every month by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the military’s Central Command, where, away from the distraction of noisy public debate, the military can privately ascertain whether it's safe to draw down troops in the last months of Bush's presidency.
Josh
Zachary
It seems clear that the Bush Administration has successfully co-opted enough military leaders (And refusing to let Fallon retire so he can't speak out) to enable them to keep the war going until their last days in office. I suspect this delay was part of the original surge plan right along.
When the next President tries to exit Iraq, Bush and his Republican and MSM enablers will use the inevitable chaos that will ensue to blame the Democrats for the disaster and enable Republicans to avoid the war's true legacy. (In the unlikely event that McCain is elected, he will be left holding the bag while the Republican simply abandon him to his fate.) This is how Bush and his enablers avoid being held accountable.
Will it work?
March 25, 2008 11:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Too bad they couldn't keep a leash on Sadr... Sad that our men and women in uniform are at the behest of Sadr and his militia.
March 25, 2008 11:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
it was ever thus.
the sadr/mahdi 'cease-fire' was the only reason the so-called surge had the appearance of tamping down the strife (particularly in baghdad).
seems to me, sadr was willing to gamble along with the US that if the surge 'worked' the US would pull out. with the US gone, sadr would only have to battle against domestic forces to take control of iraq. i'm guessing the mahdi army has finally come to realize that the US isn't going anywhere anytime in the next ten to a hundred years. waiting out the US isn't going to work since the US is just playing every side against the other.
March 25, 2008 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's a fight we need to be ready for. The American people hate the war, but they also hate to lose. The GOP will try to convince them that we "lost" Iraq, and it's up to us to constantly counter by reminding them that they knew it was lost long before it was out of Republican hands.
We cannot allow "stab in the back" to work this time.
March 25, 2008 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why don't they just put the date for a decision on a troop drawdown on a Post-It note at the end of a stick and then tie the stick to the top of our heads?
Talk about holding out hope.
I think I know how Charlie Brown feels every time he tries to kick a football.
March 25, 2008 11:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
How convenient. Extend the surge just long enough to give cover to McCain's claims that the surge is working. The game plan is obviously to hold their finger in the dyke long enough to win the election.
March 25, 2008 11:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Now that al Sadr seems to have called off his cease fire, it may be time for Operation Incoming Tide. This will be a build up of "coalition" forces needed to cover the 6 months needed for the Iraqi government to made the decision on how long this year's government vacation will be.
No one with an IQ above 80 should believe anything said by anyone associated with the Iraq fiasco or with McCain. Not to have learned that by now is surely a sign of a lower IQ.
March 25, 2008 11:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Bush is the most cynically destructive presidential poltical whore our country has every known. Americans are continuing to die in Iraq for no other reason than so Bush can dump his Iraq catastrophe into the laps of Democrats in order to screw them politically. What kind of fucked up piece of shit does that? Where do such men come from? What the fuck is going on in America?
March 25, 2008 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, who is surprised by this? They have said all along that they would be gone when mop up occurred.
How will it be possible to explain to future generations that we couldn't manage to stop any of the bloody business of this administration? Not one damned bit of it has been curtailed. Not the destruction of flesh and blood and bone, not the looting of the treasury, not the violation of the civil rights of all citizens, not the elimination of the evidence that proves that these cold criminals knew all along what they were going to pull off.
So?
March 25, 2008 1:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
the luxury of participating in a civil war for eons doesn't sit well in view of the costs.
Do Americans want to fund secterian violence at the expense of neglect of healthcare at home or our crumbling infrastructure?
I don't think so.
The next president will have to promise to give up some of the spoils to a coalition of nations to remove the pressure off this country. The war is sinking the nation, how long can we continue to borrow to keep it going? It wasn't supposed to be this way, but the poor leadership which led it caused this paradox since US wanted sole control of the oil spigot. The new president that inherits the mess it will have few choices.
March 25, 2008 2:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is PRECISELY why there needs to be a movement to investigate any and all criminal acts in the planning and execution of this war and the rest of Bush Presidency. Even if such an investigation was carried out by a non- or bi-partisan group as opposed to the Dem majority or a Dem Prez, having such an investigation into criminal acts on-going would constantly remind everyone of the horrific evil and criminal acts of this administration.
Perhaps the statute of limitations is such that any investigation could not possibly yield any criminal prosecutions, but having this disastrous administration thoroughly investigated for criminal acts will not only keep the issue in the public eye (to the Dems' benefit), but will also make more obvious -- and preserve for posterity -- that the legacy of the Bush Administration is rife with criminal behavior from the top down.
March 25, 2008 2:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nothing has gone right in this entire endeavor. No surprise given the delusion of President Bush. First he trumped up the intel, then he ignored Shinseki's advice. This administration has systematically mucked our country, Election fraud in 2000, dirty tricks got this President in power and it will take decades for us to right our ship of state. Our country will never be the same. It is irrevocably changed. We look like a bunch of bumblers who cannot even fight a 3rd world country. Our economy is drained and this war has been fought on credit. So no lying Republican for this ex-Republican. No comparison between Gulf War and Kosovo, both finished off quickly with only a few lost lives. Elect someone with some brains!!!!
March 26, 2008 12:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ever notice how CNN's Australian, not-American, not loyal to you, me, or our exhausted troops, Scud Stud in Iraq Michael Ware and Bush/Cheney/Blackwater/KBR = HAND IN GLOVE? Michael Ware is like a country of his own, and a God damn "Decider" to boot.
We can't leave Iraq. Not ever. Says Michael Ware, and it's just a COINCIDENCE that this outlook serves the war crimial war profiteers, including the ones who electrocute our troops and make U.S. tax payers pay quadruple for their (KBR) monogram to appear on every towel issued to our troops (including the ones electrocuted in the showers, I presume).
Yeah, right, Michael. No connection. You're Bush's best, loudest, longest-lasting (2003 till now) voice for staying the course, but not AT ALL for the same reasons. Nuh-uh! ROTFLMGDAO.
Michael Ware needs to be horse whipped till he bawls like a little-bitty girl. I'd go to Baghdad and do it myself if only I could. I'd go to Baghdad if it would out me face to face with this sociopath, so I could answer him back. Talk about a free ride from the "press", Michael.
March 25, 2008 5:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Think about all this if you're considering refusing to vote in November because Hillary (or Barack) didn't get the nomination.
One of my sons (southern Missouri) works with a guy whom he overheard saying, "Can you believe we are on the brink of having either a woman or a n-- for president?" My son replied in the vernacular that he intends to vote for that N. The guy's head exploded! He went into a violent rant, asking my son, "You mean to say you'll let someone bomb the shit out of our country, and then walk away without winning?! You'd vote for someone with the VERY SAME NAME as our ENEMY?!"
There are despicable estupidos out there, millions of them, and without knowing their asses from their faces, they vote.
Please, in November, please...vote against these cretins. Otherwise, it goes on. It could honestly be the actual END for us all.
March 25, 2008 5:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hi Carly.
Just got back from Sikeston, MO. The good news, heard a couple intelligent voices. Bad news, most are so prejudiced they will destroy their own chance of wellbeing rather than examine their attitudes. Crazy, isn't it?
March 26, 2008 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
BTW,
Campaign idea: BE AFRAID, BE VERY AFRAID... AFRAID YOU WILL LOSE. Lose your infrastructure, your school system, your social security benefits (currently being borrowed to assist in paying the 2 1/2 billion a week spent in Iraq), your job as we sink deeper and deeper into the mire, your privacy,etc... The list of possibilities is long, but just like my home budget, if this nation keeps dropping its income down a big black hole, we will get the luxury of understanding how the Iraqis feel, minus the bombs. Ha! And the repugs are worried about our false pride. (They are still lamenting our "losing" in Vietnam.)
March 26, 2008 11:29 AM | Reply | Permalink