Seeing The Handwriting On The Wall

It's about time that Bush is waking up to the cries for a withdrawal of our troops from Iraq. However, it's kind of curious as to why he is now considering it whereas just several weeks ago he was saying, "we must stay the course and that we will not leave until we have a victory." Has Bush finally seen the handwriting on the wall?

Why?

Is it because we have lost over 2,000 of our troops for apparently no reason? Is it because this war is growing more terrorists than it is getting rid of? Is it because the Iraqi leaders are wanting to know when the Americans are leaving and the sooner the better? Is it because of what this war is doing politically to the GOP, let us not forget the 2006 elections are coming up. Is it because this is going to go down as the disastrous legacy of the Bush Administration?

Your guess is a good as mine but no doubt we will find out the real reason soon enough. However, for me, it's thousands of lives too late.

THE CONFLICT IN IRAQ

U.S. Starts Laying Groundwork for Significant Troop Pullout From IraqBy Paul Richter and Tyler Marshall, Times Staff Writers

WASHINGTON — Even as debate over the Iraq war continues to rage, signs are emerging of a convergence of opinion on how the Bush administration might begin to exit the conflict.In a departure from previous statements, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said this week that the training of Iraqi soldiers had advanced so far that the current number of U.S. troops in the country probably would not be needed much longer.

President Bush will give a major speech Wednesday at the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Md., in which aides say he is expected to herald the improved readiness of Iraqi troops, which he has identified as the key condition for pulling out U.S. forces.The administration's pivot on the issue comes as the White House is seeking to relieve enormous pressure by war opponents. The camp includes liberals, moderates and old-line conservatives who are uneasy with the costly and uncertain nation-building effort.

It also follows agreement this week among Iraqi politicians that the U.S. troop presence ought to decrease. Meeting in Cairo, representatives of the three major ethnic and religious groups called for a U.S. withdrawal and recognized Iraqis' "legitimate right of resistance" to foreign occupation. In private conversations, Iraqi officials discussed a possible two-year withdrawal period, analysts said.

The developments seemed to lay the groundwork for potentially large withdrawals in 2006 and 2007, consistent with scenarios outlined by Pentagon planners. The approach also tracks the thinking of some centrist Democrats, such as Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware, the senior representative of his party on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Some analysts say the emerging consensus might have less to do with conditions in Iraq than the deployment's long-term strain on the U.S. military. And major questions about the readiness of Iraq's fledgling security forces remain, posing risks for any strategy that calls for an accelerated American withdrawal.

As recently as late September, senior U.S. military commanders said during a congressional hearing that just one Iraqi battalion, about 700 soldiers, was considered capable of undertaking combat operations fully independent of U.S. support. Administration officials now dismiss that measure of readiness, saying more Iraqi units are able to conduct advanced operations each day.

A former top Pentagon official who served during Bush's first term said he believed there was a "growing consensus" on withdrawing about 40,000 troops before next year's congressional election. That would be followed by further substantial pullouts in 2007 if it became clear that Iraqi forces could contain the insurgency."

You've got the convergence of domestic pressures, Iraqi pressures and Pentagon [withdrawal] plans that have been in the works for a while," said the former official, who requested anonymity. "This is serious."

A senior U.S. official said that in signaling hopes for a large drawdown next year, Rice was only "stating the obvious" this week."It looks like things are headed in the right direction to enable that to happen in 2006," said the official, who also spoke on condition of anonymity.

But he said those hopes could be derailed if there were setbacks. Among the upcoming markers is the Dec. 15 election for a permanent Iraqi government. Officials have said that violence is likely to increase before the vote. More than 100 U.S. troops have died in the month since the death toll reached 2,000.

U.S. officials hope that by the end of 2007, the remaining U.S. force will be small enough to not offend Iraqi sensibilities yet large enough to help Iraq's military with reconnaissance, intelligence gathering and air power.

Such an approach may be more acceptable to Republican candidates who are worried about next year's midterm election amid plummeting public support for the war and perhaps to GOP presidential candidates looking toward 2008.

Bush's handling of the war has the support of about 35% of the public, according to the latest Gallup poll. Other recent surveys have shown that only 40% of Americans believe the president is honest and trustworthy.

In recent months, Bush has rebuffed questions about a withdrawal schedule, saying that providing a specific timetable would hearten insurgents and encourage them to wait out U.S. forces.

There are about 160,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, and a widening field of critics has called for reductions.

Last week, Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), known as a military hawk, said it was time for the U.S. to begin withdrawing troops. His statement initially provoked a furious administration response that Bush and Vice President

Dick Cheney later sought to temper.The shift in the administration's attitude also may reflect concern that the U.S. military can't bear the current strains indefinitely. Some analysts believe the potential long-term damage to the armed forces, not political pressure, could be the decisive factor for Bush and his advisors.

continued...

Speaking Of Revisionism

I've been reading some of the Conservative Bloggers and I must say, they seem to have a reading comprehension problem, hearing problem and disillusionment problem. Their party is in such dire straights that they are absolutely making stuff [I'm being nice here] up about the Democrats.

They talk about how all Democrats are calling for an immediate military withdrawal from Iraq and how this shows that they support terrorism. This of course is not true. Congressman Murtha said, "To immediately redeploy U.S. troops consistent with the safety of U.S. forces." Senator Byrd, who did not vote in support of the war is calling to start bringing our troops home. It was in fact the GOP leadership of the House who called for a vote on the immediate withdrawal of our troops from Iraq, in fear that Congressman Murtha's plan might take hold and by golly, it looks like it did.

Oh dear oh dear and now this morning we wake up to this news...

Iraqi Leaders Call ForPullout Timetable
Iraqi Leaders Call for Timetable for Withdrawal of U.S.-Led Forces

By SALAH NASRAWI Associated Press Writer
The Associated Press

CAIRO, Egypt Nov 22, 2005 — Reaching out to the Sunni Arab community, Iraqi leaders called for a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S.-led forces and said Iraq's opposition had a "legitimate right" of resistance.

The communique finalized by Shiite, Kurdish and Sunni leaders Monday condemned terrorism but was a clear acknowledgment of the Sunni position that insurgents should not be labeled as terrorists if their operations do not target innocent civilians or institutions designed to provide for the welfare of Iraqi citizens.

The leaders agreed on "calling for the withdrawal of foreign troops according to a timetable, through putting in place an immediate national program to rebuild the armed forces … control the borders and the security situation" and end terror attacks.

The preparatory reconciliation conference, held under the auspices of the Arab League, was attended by Iraqi President Jalal Talabani and Iraqi Shiite and Kurdish lawmakers as well as leading Sunni politicians.

Sunni leaders have been pressing the Shiite-majority government to agree to a timetable for the withdrawal of all foreign troops. The statement recognized that goal, but did not lay down a specific time reflecting instead the government's stance that Iraqi security forces must be built up first.

On Monday, Iraqi Interior Minister Bayan Jabr suggested U.S.-led forces should be able to leave Iraq by the end of next year, saying the one-year extension of the mandate for the multinational force in Iraq by the U.N. Security Council this month could be the last.

"By the middle of next year we will be 75 percent done in building our forces and by the end of next year it will be fully ready," he told the Arab satellite station Al-Jazeera.

Debate in Washington over when to bring troops home turned bitter last week after decorated Vietnam War vet Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., called for an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, and estimated a pullout could be complete within six months. Republicans rejected Murtha's position.

On a side note, I have always said that if the Iraqi are really smart they will tell America [Bush] to get out of their country, as in "Yankee go home." heh heh

On another side note, looks like the Republicans are going to have to revise their thinking. [cough]

Thank God, you people are finally waking up!

Woodward, We Hardly Know you

I remember when, Bob Woodward, the scrappy young reporter uncovered the Watergate scandal. What a hero he was to all of us who were against the Nixon Administration. At that time there was complete jubilation that the Nixon Administration's corruption was finally uncovered. I have always respected Woodward for having the guts to break that story. But now...

As Huffington states, Woodward has gone from exposing a presidential cover-up in Watergate to covering up his role in Plamegate.

Sadly, Woodward is now being compared to Judith Miller. As John at Americablog says: It's also beginning to sound a lot like Bob Woodward is becoming our next Judith Miller. His repeated rants in defense of this administration, and against the special prosecutor, certainly take on a very interesting edge considering Mr. Woodward didn't bother disclosing that he was quite involved in this story, and was hardly the impartial observer his silence suggested he was. Not to mention, he knew all along that HE TOO had received the leak, suggesting that a clear pattern of multiple leaks was developing, yet he still went on TV and said that all of these repeated leaks were just a slip of the tongue?

How low you have sunk, Mr. Woodward, from the hero of Watergate to a villain of Plamegate, we hardly know you.

Confessions Of A Repentant Republican

I hope to see more and more Republicans for Humility. I was heartened to find this website, thank you Consortuim News.

Confessions of a Repentant Republican
by William Frey, M. D.

“See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda.” - George W. Bush, 5/24/05

I supported George W. Bush in the presidential election in 2000, believing then that he best reflected my love for America and for our tradition of liberty. I supported the war in Afghanistan. In March of 2003, I believed that the invasion of Iraq was justified based upon pre-war revelations presented to Congress and to the American people. Accordingly, the indictments contained herein apply, first and foremost, to myself.

Many Americans whom I know and love, including many current supporters of President Bush, remain conflicted over both his ultimate intentions in Iraq as well as domestic curtailment of civil liberties.

Many have given the benefit of the doubt to President Bush, and, in a misdirected spirit of unity, have supported, as did I, Administration policies that conflict with our essential values.

This essay explores many of the issues that led me personally to the recognition that the policies I was supporting in Iraq were not consistent with the justifications made for the invasion in the spring of 2003, that implicit in our post-invasion actions was the goal of permanent occupation, which would ensure endless war and the resultant degradation of our liberty, our security, and our moral authority.

For me, recognizing that I could no longer support the President for whom I voted, and the occupation of a land we had invaded, remains personally painful.

I have learned that while it is difficult to admit being wrong, such recognition is a prerequisite for redemptive action, necessary both for individual growth and for the healing of our nation.

It is in this spirit that I submit these reflections.

William Frey, M. D.November, 2005