Have you heard: The Bush admin is against a timetable!

ProSense

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Nov-29-06 01:04 PM
Original message

Have you heard: The Bush admin is against a timetable!

It's mentioned in every article, but missing is any reference to the only plan, Kerry's, calling for the U.S. to set a deadline and get out of iraq. Must be that other deadly distraction!

November 29, 2006

No consensus yet on troop levels, commission says

The Associated Press

WASHINGTON � Members of an independent commission on Iraq policy could not reach a consensus Tuesday on how many or how long U.S. troops should remain in Iraq, forcing the group to return for a third day of debate, according to an official close to the panel�s negotiations.

Panel members mostly made no comment as they left the Woodrow Wilson Center on Tuesday afternoon. But Leon Panetta, former White House chief of staff to President Clinton, hinted at some struggles, telling reporters, �Trying, trying to find a ... trying to find consensus. ... It goes up and down.�

The Iraq Study Group, a bipartisan panel created to recommend changes in U.S. war policy, is having difficulties reaching agreement on what the appropriate level of U.S. troops should be in Iraq, whether there should be a phased withdrawal, and if so, under what time frame, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the panel�s deliberations are private.

A second official has said that the commission was unlikely to propose a timetable for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq but that some members seemed to favor setting a date for only an initial withdrawal, an idea that has been pushed by many congressional Democrats.

The first official said Tuesday that the group was still struggling over whether to set a hard deadline for withdrawing U.S. forces or if there should be any short-term increase in troops as the U.S. works to train and build up Iraq�s security forces. There are currently about 139,000 U.S. troops in Iraq.

more...

Can't mention that it's Kerry's plan, syndication would give him too much coverage:

Army Times

Marine Times

Gates Warns Against Leaving Iraq 'in Chaos'

Defense Nominee Says He Opposes Speedy Pullout

By Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, November 29, 2006; Page A05

Robert M. Gates, President Bush's nominee to become the next secretary of defense, said he opposes a swift pullout from Iraq, arguing in written testimony submitted yesterday to Congress that "leaving Iraq in chaos would have dangerous consequences both in the region and globally for many years to come."

more...

Danger! Danger! There is that conventional wisdom again: The U.S. military is the solution to the anarchy in Iraq!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Union Thug

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Nov-29-06 01:11 PM
Response to Original message

1. Yeah. The MSM is also reporting that Al Quaida 'started' the

'sectarian violence', but now it's taken on 'a life of its own..."

So, there were no tensions between Shiite, Sunni and the Kurds before BushCo started bombing?

The MSM is getting more and more pathetic every day.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

blm

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Nov-29-06 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #1

3. Corpmedia never fails with their own poor grasp of the region.

BTW, the withdrawal plan evolved into Kerry-Feingold plan and 11 other senators sided with it. Just to give full credit to all who acknowledged the reality of civil war at the time.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

ProSense

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Nov-29-06 01:48 PM
Response to Original message

2. Set A Deadline for Iraq

Set A Deadline for Iraq:

We are determined to win the war on terror and recognize that there is no more important objective than defeating the global terrorist networks that threaten us today. We know the United States must strengthen its hand in dealing with Iran's nuclear threat. We refuse to accept the Taliban retaking Afghanistan. We recognize the growing threat of a potential new al Qaeda beachhead in Somalia and the Horn of Africa.

For these reasons -- and foremost because it is critical to strengthening our national security -it is long past time to set a deadline for the redeployment of American forces out of Iraq.

Our enemies are thrilled we're bogged down in Iraq. The terrorists are thrilled we're stuck in a quagmire. And we're ignoring growing threats around the world that truly threaten our national security.

There is a better choice - the only responsible choice for our security: redeploying our troops from Iraq. Our troops have done their job in Iraq. It's time to redeploy them so that we can focus our resources on defeating al Qaeda and its affiliated terrorist groups. At the same time, it's time for Iraqis to stand up for Iraq. To make Iraq self-reliant, we need clear deadlines, not an open-ended commitment of U.S. forces.

We know the verdict of our generals: our troops have accomplished their military mission; the only way forward is a political settlement. We need to listen to General Casey, the top American military commander in Iraq, who argued that our large military presence "feeds the notion of occupation" and "extends the amount of time that it will take for Iraqi security forces to become self-reliant." Iraqi politicians have proven they only respond to deadlines - a deadline to transfer authority, and deadlines to hold three elections. It was only the most intense eleventh-hour pressure that brought forward a consensus Prime Minister. It was the only the most intense eleventh-hour pressure that forced the Iraqis to complete their government. And that is why we need a deadline now for Iraqis to stand up and fight for their own country.

It is time to set a schedule with the new Iraqi government for the redeployment of American combat forces. Doing so will empower the new Iraqi leadership, put Iraqis in the position of running their own country and undermine support for the insurgency. There is no doubt that much of the instability in Iraq is being fueled by the majority of Iraqis who want us to leave their country. Only troops essential to finishing the job of training Iraqi forces and conducting targeted anti-terrorist operations should remain.

Key to this transition is a long overdue engagement in serious and sustained diplomacy. To give Iraq its best hope for a peaceful future, convene a summit that includes the leaders of that country, its neighbors, and representatives from the Arab League, NATO, the UN and the European Union to forge the comprehensive political solution that is necessary to bring stability to Iraq. Making it clear that America will not stay in Iraq forever pressures the regional players to step up and assume their fair share of the burden - indeed it may be the only step that will get Iraqis' neighbors directly, and positively, engaged in helping establish the stability of Iraq.

The United States should maintain an over-the-horizon military presence in the Middle East to support counter-terrorist operations, such as those that resulted in the killing of al-Zarqawi, and protect regional security interests. But it is essential to understand that the longer we stay in Iraq, the more we delay Iraqis creating stability, and the less safe our country is from the real threats that face us around the world.

Congress, which shares responsibility for getting us into Iraq, must take responsibility for helping to get us out. It is time for Iraqis to do their job - it's time for Iraqis to stand up for Iraq. It's time for Iraqis to want democracy for themselves as much as we want it for them, and it is time for the United States to act in the best interests of our national security both in Iraq and in the broader war against al Qaeda and its affiliates. We must redeploy to win - and we will put this national security imperative to a test in the United States Senate this week.

From April to anarchy

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mandyky

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Nov-29-06 02:02 PM
Response to Original message

4. In more ways than one!

The biggest shock will be when the Dems take control of Congress and this administration really becomes a lame duck presidency!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

ProSense

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Nov-29-06 04:40 PM
Response to Original message

5. Iraq Study Group to unveil report on December 6

Edited on Wed Nov-29-06 04:41 PM by ProSense

Iraq Study Group to unveil report on December 6

By Arshad Mohammed and Steve Holland
1 hour, 30 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Iraq Study Group, an independent, bipartisan panel charged with evaluating U.S. policy in Iraq, will release its report on December 6, sources close to the group's deliberations said on Wednesday.

"On December 6 the Iraq Study Group will present its report to President George W. Bush, the U.S. Congress and the American people," said the source, who spoke on condition that he not be named.

Bush, whose Republicans lost control of the U.S. Congress last month due largely to the president's handling of the Iraq war, is under strong pressure for a major shift in course, and many in Washington hope the report will provide an impetus for change.

"I wouldn't say it's totally final but they've reached consensus on some very difficult issues," said another source who asked not to be named. "There were very intense debates and they came up with some compromises to get everybody on board."

more...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Fri May 03rd 2024, 04:59 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.