Posted on 11/12/2006 9:07:03 AM PST by TexKat
BAGHDAD, Iraq - Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the top commander in Iraq, voiced confidence Saturday that the United States would not abandon its mission in this violence-racked country amid a post-election re-evaluation of Iraq strategy. "The weeks and months ahead will require courage and determination," Casey said at a Veterans Day naturalization ceremony for 75 U.S. troops at Baghdad's Camp Victory. "But succeed we will."
His comments were among his first public statements since the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld last week.
Washington political insiders have speculated that Casey and U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad, who was also at the ceremony, could leave their posts following the Republican Party's defeat Tuesday at the polls. Both men quickly left Saturday's ceremony after reading prepared statements.
In Washington, meanwhile, the re-evaluation will begin in earnest Monday. On that day, a panel of prestigious Americans will begin deliberations to chart a new course on Iraq, with the goal of trying to stabilize the country with a different U.S. strategy and possibly begin withdrawing more than 140,000 troops.
Tuesday's dramatic election results, widely seen as a repudiation of the Bush Iraq policy, have thrust the 10-member, bipartisan Iraq Study Group into an unusual position, similar to that played by the 9/11 commission.
This panel, led by former Secretary of State James A. Baker III and former Rep. Lee Hamilton of Indiana, may play a decisive role in reshaping the U.S. position in Iraq, according to lawmakers and administration officials.
Those familiar with the panel's work predict the ultimate recommendations will not appear novel and that the country has few, if any, good options remaining. Many of the ideas reportedly being considered - more aggressive regional diplomacy with Syria and Iran, greater emphasis on training Iraqi troops or focusing on a new political deal between warring Shiite and Sunni factions - have been tried or have limited chances of success, in the view of many experts on Iraq.
Baker is also exploring whether a broader U.S. initiative in tackling the Arab-Israeli conflict is needed to help stabilize the region.
Given the grave predicament the group faces, its focus is now as much on finding a political solution for the United States as a plan that would bring peace to Iraq. With Republicans and Democrats so bitterly divided over the war, Baker and Hamilton consider a consensus plan of key importance, according to those who have spoken with them.
That could appeal to both parties. Democrats would have something to support after a campaign in which they criticized Bush's Iraq policy without offering many specifics of their own. With support for its Iraq policy fast evaporating even within its own party, the White House might find in the group's plan a politically acceptable exit strategy or cover for a continued effort to prop up the new democratically elected government in Baghdad.
"Baker's objectives for the Iraq Study Group are grounded in his conviction that Iraq is the central foreign policy issue confronting the United States and that the only way to address that issue successfully is to first build a bipartisan consensus," said Arnold Kanter, who served as undersecretary of state under Baker during the first Bush administration.
But the election may have made the job even tougher by emboldening the panel's Democrats, said people familiar with the panel's deliberations. The election "sent a huge signal," said one of these sources, who added that the panel is trying to come to grips with whether the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki can solve Iraq's problems.
While Baker has been testing the waters for some time to determine how much change in Iraq policy the White House will tolerate, Hamilton faces the perhaps now even-more-difficult challenge of cajoling Democrats like Leon Panetta, White House chief of staff during the Clinton administration, and power broker Vernon Jordan to sign on to a plan that falls short of a phased troop withdrawal, the position of many congressional Democrats.
In a brief interview, Hamilton conceded the obstacles ahead and emphasized that no decisions had been made. "We need to get [the report] drafted, number one," Hamilton said. "We need to reach agreement, and that may not be possible."
When formed last spring by Congress, the Iraq Study Group was little known beyond elite circles of the U.S. foreign policy world. Now its work has become perhaps the most eagerly awaited Washington report in many years - recommendations are now expected early next month - with many lawmakers of both parties saying they are looking for answers to the troubled U.S. mission in Iraq.
Indeed, the White House, which had been skeptical the group will have much new to say, has been notably more receptive since the election.
"If these recommendations help bring greater consensus for Republicans and Democrats, I think that could be very helpful," said Dan Bartlett, counselor to Bush, though he added, "If there were a rifle-shot solution we would have already pulled the trigger."
Bush, Vice President Cheney and Stephen Hadley, the president's national security adviser, will meet with members of the commission Monday.
During three days of deliberations, the panel also will hear by video link from British Prime Minister Tony Blair - who sources said has been anxious to talk to the group - as well as consult with the Democratic shadow foreign policy Cabinet, including former Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright, U.N. Ambassador Richard Holbrooke and Sandy Berger, national security adviser.
Dear God in heaven...
Dear God is right. Can Cheney save us? He may be the only voice of reason left in that place. I am miserably disappointed by all this. I still hope Bush will pleasantly surprise us. Praying hard.
And thank goodness for that. They sure are doing a lot of whining on this thread tonight. Wonder what they actually do to help the conservative movement?
I mean, besides whine and throw in the towel at the first sign of trouble.
Let's get 'em some white flags. 
Those are the same people who got us in this mess in the first place!
I would think even the democrats have to know this is unthinkable. Even if it's for the baser reason of them wanting to survive in the majority in '08. They can't seriously believe that not tending to this will assure power? Their main concern, as it relates to maintaining power, has got to be that they can match President Bush's record on keeping us safe, i.e. not taking another hit.
To eliminate our presence in Iraq, after what it took to establish it, can't be what they're thinking. Unless they are so disengaged from the truth (which is possible) that they are completely whacked.
One of the democrats problems are the people they have ready to assume command of the committees. I think Rangle gets the banking committee, and he is an unreflecting idealogue who can really impact the funding of the war effort. Not good.
Pessimists always call their views "realism."
I don't need anyone to tell me what to do. We're not stupid over here - well, unless you believe John Kerry.
We're committed to making this work, though and we're not going to give up because of a setback.
Y'all go on ahead and doom the country and plan the big failure and stuff. Just don't be offended if we choose not to join you.
A New Man. Next, A New Plan For Iraq?
Rumsfeld's exit opens the door to fresh thinking
By Anna Mulrine and Kevin Whitelaw
Posted Sunday, November 12, 2006
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld didn't appear on any ballot last week, but the war that he and President Bush have waged in Iraq emerged as perhaps the most decisive factor in the Republican defeat. After a dreadful year of worsening sectarian violence and revenge attacks, polls have clearly shown a diminishing faith in the Bush administration's ability to turn things around in Iraq-nearly 6 in 10 voters said they disapprove of the war.
President Bush wasted no time in announcing Rumsfeld's resignation (though insisting that the departure was planned regardless of the election's outcome). The nomination of former CIA Director Robert Gates for the Pentagon post is a clear signal that the White House is trying to shake off its history of "stay the course" rhetoric. But while Bush's motivation might have more to do with politics than with military strategy, Gates could make a real difference. A member of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group led by former Rep. Lee Hamilton and former Secretary of State James Baker, who served in the first President Bush's administration, Gates could be a critical bridge between the White House and the clutch of foreign-policy graybeards many Republicans and Democrats are looking to as a lifeline— a last-gasp chance to reverse the downward trend in Iraq.
Shifting gears. The choice of Gates eases the way for Bush to latch on to at least some of Baker's proposals, due out soon. Baker's group could point to a strategy that "is a little different— or totally different," Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno, who next month will become the No. 2 commander in Iraq, tells U.S. News. In any event, he adds, "it's going to be very much a factor."
The Baker report is expected to cement a shift in emphasis from creating a model democracy in the Middle East to simply achieving stability in Iraq-still no small feat. "Both the American people and the Congress don't want this to last a lot longer," says a senior U.S. military official. "You'll always get the party line of 'stay the course,' but everybody realizes that it's to a point." The question of an American troop surge, advocated by Republican Sen. John McCain, will come to the fore as well. "Do we need more people, or do they become a greater irritant?" asks Odierno. "There comes a time when you wear out your welcome."
Challenges. There are no magic bullets in Iraq. The underlying problem is that America's ability to change the dynamic there appears to be continually diminishing. The Sunni insurgents remain disturbingly strong—October was the deadliest month for U.S. soldiers in nearly two years. And troops have been unable to quell the sectarian violence. A vaunted security plan for Baghdad has failed to stem the bloodshed, Iraqi security forces remain unreliable, and U.S. officials have been unable to persuade Iraq's government to confront the Shiite militias or their leaders. The White House was particularly discouraged by what National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley found on his recent trip to Iraq. "The situation there is as complex as it's ever been and is getting more complicated every couple of weeks," says a senior administration official.
Gates would be greeted at the Pentagon by "one of the most monumental challenges ever facing a secretary of defense," says Larry Wilkerson, a retired colonel who was chief of staff to former Secretary of State Colin Powell. Gates is known more for being a good manager and a consensus builder than for his out-of-the-box thinking. His career in government began 40 years ago when he joined the Central Intelligence Agency as an analyst. A renowned Soviet expert, he would be reunited with many former Bush 41 colleagues. In a speech last year, Gates signaled the need for patience in Iraq. "We need to stay there," he said, "as long as necessary to get the job done."
But the Cold War veteran would represent a return to the philosophy of "realpolitik" in foreign policy. In the same speech, he laid out a definition of victory that is much less sweeping than the one described by Bush administration's early rhetoric about bringing democracy to Iraq. "We all hope that it will be quick-that in a year or two, this government in Iraq will be secure enough that they will be able to invite us to leave," Gates said. "And we can do so, leaving behind a government that can survive."
Gates could help usher in a new diplomatic outreach in the region, reversing the administration's refusal to engage with Iran and Syria. Two years ago, Gates chaired a task force that called for reopening a dialogue with Iran. Baker has also signaled that his Iraq Study Group is likely to call for new efforts to enlist Iraq's neighbors to help create stability in Iraq.
But one of his biggest diplomatic challenges may be contending with pressure from the new Democratic-controlled Congress for a speedy drawdown in Iraq. The likely incoming chairmen of the Senate and House Armed Services committees both called last week for "redeployments"—meaning withdrawal—of U.S. troops to begin before the end of this year. "The key is to begin a reduction of U.S. forces in Iraq," says Sen. Carl Levin, currently the ranking Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee. "Make Iraqis decide—do they want a civil war, or do they want a new nation?"
A quick withdrawal from Iraq remains unlikely, and Rumsfeld's departure may do little to change the dynamic on the ground. "It's like a new coach coming in," says one Pentagon official. "The guy doesn't yell at you anymore, and the guy doesn't ask you to do the impossible anymore. But at the same time, your losing season continues to be your losing season."
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/061112/20iraq_2.htm
British patrol boat attacked, four dead
From correspondents in London
November 13, 2006 03:37am
FOUR British troops were killed and three seriously wounded in an attack on a patrol boat in the southern Iraqi city of Basra, the Ministry of Defence in London said today.
Their boat was attacked on the Shatt al Arab river, a ministry statement said, but it gave no further details.
A military spokesman told the BBC that the patrol was caught in an explosion caused by an improvised bomb.
"The use of improvised explosive devices is very common in Iraq," said Captain Tane Dunlop, the Multi-National forces spokesman in south Iraq.
"It is slightly unusual in that this time it was targeting a boat."
Britain has some 7000 troops in southern Iraq, which has generally been calmer than the centre and north of the country.
More than 120 British armed forces personnel have died in Iraq since the US-led invasion in 2003.
For better or worse (and I think it's better overall), our elected government make policy, not the military leadership.
The military have done a lot of good things in Iraq, but we must face facts - they haven't figured out a strategy to win. In modern America, a non-winning strategy is a losing one.
It still isn't too late but time is running out.
By Robert Kagan and William Kristol
Reading is your friend!
When formed last spring by Congress, the Iraq Study Group was little known beyond elite circles of the U.S. foreign policy world.
Pentagon reviews Iraq war strategy
Sat Nov 11, 8:30 AM ET
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Top U.S. military leaders have begun a broad review of strategy in Iraq and other crisis areas in the Bush administration's campaign against terrorism, The New York Times reported in Saturday editions.
Citing Pentagon officials, the Times reported that Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Peter Pace had assembled a team of what it called some of the military's brightest and most innovative officers and charged them with taking a fresh look at Iraq, Afghanistan and other flashpoints.
Pace announced the review in a series of television interviews on Friday but did not give many details.
The New York Times said that among ideas discussed were increasing the size of the Iraqi security forces, along with U.S. efforts to train and equip them, and adjusting the size of the American force in Iraq.
It added that Pentagon officials stressed that the review extended well beyond Iraq, and that some unorthodox ideas on how to fight terrorism were being weighed.
The military review, which formally began September 25, is being coordinated with the rest of the government, but the team has not met with members of the Iraq Study Group, the commission that is also looking into options for Iraq, the Times said, citing the Pentagon officials.
The officials said the team's objective was to outline options that Pace might draw on in advising President George W. Bush and Robert Gates, Bush's choice for the new defense secretary.
The team involved in the military review includes Col. H. R. McMaster, an Army officer whose 2005 operation in Tal Afar has been cited as a textbook case in how to wage counterinsurgency in Iraq, as well as Col. Peter Mansoor, the director of the United States Army and Marine Corps Counterinsurgency Center at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., who commanded an Army brigade that fought the Mahdi Army militia in 2004 at Karbala, the newspaper reported.
Also on the team is Col. Thomas Greenwood, the director of the Marine Command and Staff College who oversaw efforts to train Iraqi security forces in Anbar, the Times said. In all, more than a dozen military officers are on the team, which is overseen by Capt. Michael Rogers of the Navy, a special assistant to Pace, the report said.
The review, which includes the participation of Gen. George Casey Jr., the top commander in Iraq, and General John Abizaid, the head of the United States Central Command, is meant to be completed in early December.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061111/ts_nm/iraq_usa_strategy_dc_3
Iraq: Sectarian Charges Rejected
November 12, 2006 19 03 GMT
Iraq's Defense Ministry rejected charges Nov. 12 that Iraqi Maj. Gen. Shakir Hulail Hussein al-Kaabi, commander of Iraqi Fifth Division responsible for security in Diyala province, targets Sunnis while ignoring the actions of Shiite militias, Reuters reported. The charges came from U.S. Maj. Gen. Benjamin Mixon, commander for all of northern Iraq.
http://www.stratfor.com/products/premium/read_article.php?id=280442
I hope that they come to their senses after their anger subsides. Others are just dim operatives.
LLS
Except that, instead of covering Klintoons sorry A$$, this 'Study Group' will be, as evidence by the membership, charged by the Dims with putting together the Bush Impeachment 'evidence'.
JMO ... ~GCR~
The Iraq Study Group
November 12, 2006
Email this Print this Since beginning work in March, the Baker-Hamilton study group has consulted with officials in Iraq and across the region and with current and former U.S. military commanders, analysts, commentators and academics.
What's expected is a call for Iraqis to assume control over a steadily increasing share of their own security.
The time frame should be set by the elected Iraqi government, not dictated by the United States, said Frederick Barton, a member of the study group, to help establish the government as an effective and credible democratic force.
A master deal maker who pulled together the U.S.-led coalition that defeated Iraq in the first Gulf War, James Baker is almost certain to advocate a new strategic dialogue with regional players, including Iran and Syria, as essential to stability. While President George W. Bush has long been committed to holding Iraq together as a single country, a strong federalist model -- as Iraq's post-war constitution calls for -- appears to be essential.
"It won't be cut and run. It'll be turn and walk," said retired Army Gen. Lawrence Wilkerson, professor of political science at the College of William and Mary.
"Turn and walk will take 18 months, maybe two years."
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061112/NEWS07/611120608/1009
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.