Wednesday, November 22, 2006

We Are in a State of Flux


Which way for Bush & Blair's un-provoked, unnecessary, largely unilateral invasion and unplanned occupation of Iraq (UULUIUOI)?

There is plenty on the post-Thanksgiving policy menu for our nations' leaders.
  1. Stay the course, with tactical adjustments, says President Bush, with an echo from top U.S. military leaders.

    The administration's current approach is to continue efforts to suppress violence while pressuring the Iraqi government to reach political agreements, control the militias and strengthen security forces.

    In the latest tactical shift, military leaders are planning to sharply increase the number of U.S. advisors working with Iraqi security forces. They hope American forces can be drawn down as Iraqi units take control of all regions of the country, which they say can happen within 18 months.

  2. Temporary increase in U.S. troop level say Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), retired Marine Gen. Anthony Zinni and some neoconservatives.

    The Pentagon could temporarily boost the current troop level by substantial numbers — in the tens of thousands — to try to suppress violence in key areas, such as Baghdad and Sunni-dominated Al Anbar province.

  3. Gradual withdrawal say many Democratic leaders.

    The Bush administration could begin a gradual drawdown of troops over several years, possibly coupled with a redeployment that would move U.S. forces into a support position. Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), incoming chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, says the administration should begin a drawdown in four to six months. He argues that U.S. forces should shift to more limited missions, such as training Iraqi forces and fighting foreign insurgents. Iraqis say they want a withdrawal over several years, but each major group wants a pullout structured to protect its interests.

  4. Partition or decentralization say some Kurds, former U.S. diplomat Peter Galbraith and Sen. Joseph R. Biden.

    This option has a variety of applications: Iraq could be formally divided into Shiite, Kurdish and Sunni states, or the three regions could be given wide autonomy around a weak central government that would retain some responsibilities for foreign policy, defense and trade. The Iraqi Constitution provides the foundation for greater regional autonomy.

  5. An immediate withdrawal is not on the table as far as elected political leaders are concerned. Not yet . . .

16 comments:

  1. What a couple of clowns these two look like. ~!~

    Merely pawns they are. Bigger cogs, at least in their minds, but cogs nevertheless.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I wish I could say I find the story you posted here interesting Vigilante , but mostly I see it as disinformation , and a smokescreen for the reality not portrayed .

    I don`t want to be redundant , but the real issue here , as to why we went and are staying for the foreseeable future is the oil. Big Oil controls our political machine. Both sides.

    ReplyDelete
  3. vigilante
    I discussed this last week I think and it looks to me like Bush is now going to hurry and now do one of the three leaked recommendations by the Pantagon.
    All 3 are wrong but he is setting up Dems because he knows the 3 options will fail and be turned down by Dems who he will then make fun of like the idiot usually does but it will again backfire on him.
    Dems are right in saying we should have a slow strategic well planned withdrawal
    Any way you look at it Iraq can not succeed. I was concerned that my EOD son would be going there after Afghanistan but he likes Afghanistan and wants to put in for another tour.
    I still worry what Iraq and the middle east will look like in a year from now and when Bush is going to find justification to attack Iran and further his new middle east order especially now knowing a return to the draft is being bandied about.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The picture actually is strangely erotic. There is such tenderness in it that one wishes to see it between world leaders more often. :)

    There hardly (and justifiably) is any relevant discussions about winning in Iraq. Thankfully, the single minded - stay the course - is having to compete with other options after the Republican defeat. Too bad, that none of the options looks good for America. Theoratically, to train Iraqi police and Army to achieve the competence to provide sorely needed security for the citizens is the only way to go. Even this option might not bee doable at this point of time.

    Training that has taken place there has been, following the common trend, tragedy and slap stick comedy rolled in one. Major portion of training has been conducted by personel without any combat experience and, if this isn't bad enough, without any ways to communicate. There has been mind boggling shortage of intrepeters and a largre portion of those they have don't speak English. The key element for any organization is to install the right person for each and every position for success and this appears not have been done yet again.

    Like I said, there is no good options left and maybe cut and run is the way to go. One thing, though, is for sure; the region is going to pay for this blunder for a long, long time.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Happy Thanksgiving!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Government have announced that we will be out of Iraq before the May elections, suspect army will confine themselves to barracks by Christmas. Major Scandal erupting over cheap ammunition from Pakistan that jams and misfires.

    I have tagged you all on the Ten things that I would not do- Happy Thanksgiving Guys

    ReplyDelete
  7. Allow me to add to the mix:

    Happy Thanksgiving!!!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Guthrum, you Brits always seem to have more taste, if not better judgment than us Yanks. Blair appears to be determined to get out of Basra before his successor, Gordon Brown, has to deal with it. Bush has no sense of taste, other than what's in his mouth.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The new Marine commandant, Gen. James Conway, has warned that it could take years to adequately train and equip the Iraqi security forces — longer, perhaps, "than the timeline that we probably feel ... our country will support."

    He also suggested that the current stress on the Corps has adversely affected its future mission to serve the nation.

    Yahoo

    ReplyDelete
  10. Pekka, How could it get worse?

    It sometimes looks to me as if, unable to get at the US troops, the Iraqis just slaughter each other at a greater and greater rate to demonstrate to us that it's increasingly futile to pretend that we have an effective occupation and control over things. Call it a collective impulse to mutual suicide. If that's the case, the sooner we get out, the sooner our part in providing a stimulus for the violence gets out of the way of Iraqis resolving their end.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Vigil, this whole sorry mess can now be settled by Iraqis alone. The way American forces are hunkered down in safe zones, and impotently watching while civil war is raging around them, is leaving them no other role to play than perhaps drawing in more jihadists from the outside.

    Three years ago, Bush declared that those of whom don't join the U.S. in her effort to get rid of Saddam will find themselves irrelevant in the new world that he was making. English poodle, Tony, took the bait, gambled, lost and became irrelevant with the man, Bush, himself.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Pekka, how bad can it be, if Bush has to go and meet al-Maliki in Jordan? I think the Pentagon has concluded that Baghdad is just too dangerous and unpredictable to allow Bush to go there anymore. Not even safe enough in the Green Zone, which was penetrated last week.

    ReplyDelete
  13. It's a relief that Vigilante has finally listened to Contretemps:

    It's not Bush alone who has authored this tragedy. We have to include the co-author, Tony "Poodle-kins" Blair.

    ReplyDelete