Rumsfeld Won't Set Iraq Pullout Timeline

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld rejected calls by some lawmakers for the Bush administration to set a timetable for U.S. withdrawal from Iraq. "That would be a mistake," he told a Senate panel Thursday.

"Timing in war is never predictable. There are never guarantees," Rumsfeld told the Senate Armed Services Committee. "Those who say we are losing this war are wrong. We are not."

Congressional Democrats are demanding answers about the future presence of U.S. troops in Iraq.

Rumsfeld, testifying on the progress in training Iraq's own security forces, said these forces have "a way to go," but progress was being made.

"Success will not be easy and it will require patience. ... But consider what has been accomplished in 12 months," Rumsfeld said, citing elections in January, economic improvements, and an increasingly improving security force.

The Bush administration contends that Iraqis must be able to defend their own country against a lethal insurgency before a timeline for bringing home troops can be considered.

But progress has been slower than expected. In recent weeks, insurgents have increasingly targeted Iraqi security forces. And U.S. casualties, war spending and public skepticism continue to climb, ruffling both Republicans and Democrats.

"Leaving before the task is complete would be catastrophic," Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the panel.

Sen. Carl Levin (news, bio, voting record) of Michigan, the committee's senior Democrat, said there was "no military settlement without a political settlement."

He said the Bush administration should tell the Iraqis that if they do not meet their deadline for drafting a constitution — August 15, with a possible six-month extension — the United States will consider setting a timetable for troop withdrawals.

"We must demonstrate to the Iraqis that our willingness to bear the burden ... has limits," Levin said.

Committee Chairman John Warner, R-Va., praised President Bush for "steady and unflinching resolve."

"Our great nation has an enormous capacity for sacrifice and hardship when we understand the cause is just," he said.

At issue are calls by some members of Congress for a specific exit strategy. That includes a proposal by a small bipartisan group calling for Bush to start bringing home U.S. troops from Iraq by Oct. 1, 2006.

Levin took strong issue with upbeat pronouncements by the administration on progress in Iraq, singling out for ridicule Vice President Dick Cheney's claim on Memorial Day that the insurgency was in its "last throes."

"The fact is that the insurgency has not weakened," Levin said. "Our men and women in uniform are serving with great honor. They deserve an objective assessment of the situation in Iraq. They deserve a clear layout of the next steps there."

Rummy could always give them this...

New Forces to Be Deployed
The Pentagon announced today the formation of a new 500 man elite fighting unit called the US REDNECK SPECIAL FORCES (USRSF).
These North Carolina, Kentucky, West Virginia, Mississippi, Missouri, Arkansas, Alabama, Georgia, Texas and Tennessee boys will be dropped into Iraq and have been given the following facts about Terrorists:
1. The season opened today.
2. There is no limit.
3. They taste just like chicken.
4. They don't like beer, pickups, country music or Jesus.
5. They are DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE for the death of Dale Earnhardt.
This mess in Iraq should be over IN A WEEK.

Or this:

New Forces to Be Deployed
The Pentagon announced today the formation of a new 500 woman elite fighting unit called the US PMS SPECIAL FORCES (USPMSSF).
These women from all walks of life will be dropped into Iraq and have been given the following facts about Terrorists:
1. Your period starts tomorrow.
2. They have all the Midol.
3. They taste just like chocolate.
4. They don't like fine wine, SUVs, Yanni's music or Jesus.
5. They are DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE for the death of Princess Dianna.
This mess in Iraq should be over IN A WEEK.

Credit goes to Dianna in Wisconsin for that last one, the first one was an anonymous e-mail.

I was going to post the following email on FR, but I can't get the link to the story to work. However, the author is an established conservative so I'm going to post it here:

Title: Date certain is certain failure

North Carolina Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC) has become quite the media star. In recent days he's appeared on CNN, every domestic broadcast network and even Al Jazeera, and all he had to do to attract all this attention was set himself up to be used by the left in calling on the president to set a "date certain" for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.

He did it in a June 12 conversation with ABC's George Stephanopoulos, charging that the Bush administration misrepresented the facts going into Iraq at the behest of a cabal of neoconservatives and that, since it's now clear they were wrong, we ought to set a date for the withdrawal of our troops from that troubled nation. Since then he's backtracked, but by saying what he did he managed to ignite a political firestorm.

His is essentially a man-bites-dog story. It isn't all that surprising that Sen. Teddy Kennedy (D-MA), Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) and their buddies would abandon Iraq or call for something as militarily risky as setting a date certain for getting out of a war they didn't believe we should have gotten into in the first place, but for a man with Jones' ideological and pro-defense credentials to join them is, well, news.

Jones is a decent man whom many rank among the most conservative members of the House. He is a member of the House Armed Services Committee and a Jesse Helms protogi, and he represents a district that is home to numerous military bases and an estimated 60,000 veterans.

Initially a hawk on Iraq, Jones says he's had second thoughts, but one still has to wonder just what's gotten into him. It would be unfair to suggest that he's grandstanding because by joining what one North Carolina newspaper calls the 'cut and run crowd' he may be jeopardizing his seat - something Jones claims doesn't bother him.

Although his constituents simply can't imagine how the man they've elected and reelected since 1994 has managed to end up in the same camp with Kennedy and company, it must be acknowledged that many conservatives share Jones' misgivings about the way our role in Iraq has morphed from liberator to policeman and nation-builder.

Many of his fellow conservatives saw going after Saddam Hussein as justifiable even if we ultimately failed to find the weapons of mass destruction everyone thought he was stockpiling. He was, after all, an enemy whose removal freed millions of his own people while changing the strategic map for the better.

But taking out Saddam and trying to turn Iraq into a little America are two very different things; nation-building, as George W. Bush himself pointed out back in 2000, is an incredibly risky undertaking. It's a job for which our military is ill-suited and can easily lead to just the sort of mess that may be developing in Iraq today. It is a job best left to the locals, and Jones can hardly be faulted for hoping that we will turn it over to them just as soon as possible.

In addition, the reality of war seems to trouble Jones as much as it no doubt troubles those in his district who have personally experienced it. He obviously feels for those who have died or been maimed in Iraq and fears that there may be many more of them before it's over. His almost desperate, compassionate desire to keep American death to a minimum comes through, but in listening to his heart Jones has ignored his head and could, as a result, lose his job.

The desire to turn things over to the new Iraqi government and bring our troops home as soon as it makes sense to do so is shared by many - including President Bush, his secretary of defense and most of his generals. Indeed, it is a desire endorsed by all but the aspiring imperialists among us.

Calling for what Jones called for, however, is something very different and potentially far more destructive to our interests than he imagines. Providing a guarantee to our enemies and those who would harm our friends that we intend to abandon them next week, next month or even next year whether they are able to handle their own defense or not could turn a possible success over there into a real failure.

This possibility doesn't bother Jones' new allies on the left who would no doubt welcome our humiliation in Iraq as they did in Vietnam, but it ought to worry the congressman. Perhaps he's backtracking now because he has come to realize that he is being used by those who would applaud the collapse of a friendly government without giving a thought to the fact that such a collapse would render meaningless the loss of those Jones mourns.

David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union, is a managing associate with the Carmen Group, a D.C.-based governmental affairs firm.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.