What the ISG Report is REALLY ABOUT: OIL

[berni_mccoy]

Oil is mentioned 62 times throughout the document. Almost as many times as there are recommendations.

Economy/economic is mentioned 62 times

Of the 43 times diplomatic is used, it is used 24 times as the term "diplomatic offensive". The entire mindset of diplomacy in the document is about going on an "offensive". It may be a bad choice of words, but the way I read the goals of the "New Diplomatic Offensive" are as follows:
- Stop Iraq's interaction with Iran and Syria (even though Iran and Syria have taken the lead on Diplomacy)
- Get other countries, including non-neighboring Muslim countries to pay for Iraq's reconstruction
- Use military force to oppress opposition to the current government, break the militias and protect the oil

On the other hand, Diplomacy is mentioned 3 times

And while military is mentioned 99 times, withdraw/al is mentioned 6 times and redploy/ment is mentioned 5 times. In fact, the report suggests no change in troop levels, suggested timetables or withdrawal. The report says all of the following:
- No withdrawal
- No significant increase in troop levels
- No timetable

Well, that's exactly staying the course. And we all know what that means. Americans voted for a change. This report is more of the same.

[grasswire]

1. thank you

It smells, yes?

[bluerum]

2. Why do you hate America? nt

[berni_mccoy]

4. Heh. Ironic isn't it.

[Ms. Clio]

3. an excellent analysis

there was another thread/post here about the recommendation to privatize Iraq's oil, but I can't find it.

[lectrobyte]

5. Maybe this one?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2873954

[Ms. Clio]

6. yes, that was it, thanks so much!

[LSK]

7. you are right, I thought it said 80,000 would leave by 2008 BUT

A search of the PDF yields no 80,000 and that must have been said in the press conference.

It does not say 80,000 will leave by 2008.

From the Executive Summary:

"By the first quarter
of 2008, subject to unexpected developments in the security
situation on the ground, all combat brigades not necessary for
force protection could be out of Iraq. At that time, U.S. combat
forces in Iraq could be deployed only in units embedded with
Iraqi forces, in rapid-reaction and special operations teams,
and in training, equipping, advising, force protection, and
search and rescue. Intelligence and support efforts would continue.
A vital mission of those rapid reaction and special operations
forces would be to undertake strikes against al Qaeda in
Iraq."

[berni_mccoy]

8. It's full of tricky words like that. They are going to play on the fact that most

people won't read the damn thing.

[maxsolomon]

9. at least that's SOME honesty

its always been about that, and the entire bush PR operation has been about denying that.