Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

TIME: Bush's "Way Forward" on Iraq: More aggressive "Stay the Course"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
DeepModem Mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-23-06 02:56 PM
Original message
TIME: Bush's "Way Forward" on Iraq: More aggressive "Stay the Course"
Bush's "Way Forward" on Iraq: More of the Same
Analysis: It now looks like the President will order a troop surge. But in most other ways, it's "stay the course" so far
By MICHAEL DUFFY
Posted Saturday, Dec. 23, 2006

George W. Bush is not expected to lay out his "new way forward" on Iraq until he gives a speech on the crisis in the first few weeks of January. But there were pretty good indications this week of where the Bush team is going next on Iraq. The President sent three strong signals in the space of several days — and each suggested that he was not only sticking with his stay-the-course strategy, he was about to become more aggressive in prosecuting it. First, an Administration official told TIME.com Friday, there is "a good likelihood" that the president will endorse a surge of up to 30,000 troops when he gives his next-steps-on-Iraq speech early next month. There is no word yet on how many troops would be involved or how long they might be there. Nor is there any indication yet on what the mission would be, though the president said there had to be one and he talked this week a lot about the security of the Iraqi people. The surge has been backed by a handful of neoconservatives in and out of the government, along with some retired generals, most of whom have been over to the West Wing in the last 10 days to talk about it. It surely helps the surge faction that CENTCOM boss Gen. John Abezaid, who had publicly opposed the idea, announced his retirement this week. And Colin Powell would not have broken a year's silence on Iraq just to oppose the surge last Sunday unless he was pretty convinced it was gaining steam.

The President also went out of his way last week to say he was inclined to favor an expansion of "end strength" in the Army and the Marine Corps in general. That decision is about Iraq but is not about a surge: Bush had a near revolt on his hands from the service chiefs, who feel the Iraq deployment has depleted readiness, hurt morale and left the U.S. with only the thinnest reserves to fight elsewhere in the world. The Army chief of staff said in public that the Army was "broken" and the Marine Corps Commandant made similar complaints. Bush had to do something to ease that condition — and he knows there is support for such an expansion in Congress. While it would take several years to recruit, train and equip the new units, Bush's inclination here underscores how much damage the war has done to force structure. My own guess is that Bush will tout this expansion regularly in the coming weeks, not so much because it would do anything to ease conditions in Iraq in the the near term — it won't — but because it implies that he is mobilizing, once again re-applying his game face.

Which brings us to the last development of the week. Bush tried to make it clear in his press conference that whatever Americans' dissatisfaction with the conduct of the war, next year would not look much different from the one that is coming to a close. This was, said the administration official, a deliberate warning to Americans not to expect a lot of change. "The year 2007 could bring many of the same challenges and sacrifices as 2006," he said. "This was designed to let people know we have a lot more fight left."...

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1572765,00.html?cnn=yes
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Benhurst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-23-06 03:09 PM
Response to Original message
1. So much for representative government.
And so much for The World's Only Superpower, a sick, pathetic joke.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-23-06 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Oh, we ain't close to that anymore.
Banana republic, we is.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-23-06 03:12 PM
Response to Original message
2. "kill for peace"
"Kill, kill, kill for peace
Kill, kill, kill for peace
Near or middle or very far east
Far or near or very middle east
Kill, kill, kill for peace
Kill, kill, kill for peace" the fugs......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJCher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-23-06 03:25 PM
Response to Original message
3. this is tragic
I can't even begin to tell you how ill this makes me. It's unbearable: the thought of even more families suffering the loss of a loved one. And the thought that Harry Reid countenanced this is making me even more sick.

There has to be a breaking point somewhere. With so little support for this occupation, how will Americans react to this?



Cher
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
agincourt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-23-06 07:45 PM
Response to Original message
5. 200,000 more troops won't work,
when you have a pathetic lot like Bush/Cheney/Rove calling the shots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 01:10 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

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.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC