Mol, I have not read all the comments on this thread, but it seems to me that people are misunderstanding what is actually represented by this report.
It is a nothing more than a consensus of opinion, and pretty much summarizes what we have been doing, what we are doing, and some of the things we have begun to do recently, in regard to embedding, and the potential to draw down combat support as Iraqi units become more effective.
The Neo-con's view this as a disastrous report, and their candidate, John McStain has been the leader on their side with bozo Krystal as the primary mouthpiece. they advocate the Powell doctrine of overwhelming force, to win a military war that has already been won. Their advocacy of more troops will simply turn the civil strife against American troops rather than against sectarian division, and as soon as we remove ourselves from the battlefield to stop the bleeding, they will return to fighting each other.
The element required to correct this nightmare in Iraq is very simply stated as TIME. It will take time to develop cadres of leadership, both in the new Iraqi military and in the new government.
This report, with only one exception of the regional conference of neighboring nations, is a series of things that are already underway, in the works, or on the board to do.
I could call it the "stay the course" document, and it is largely informative and represents little or no change in policy or strategy.
It really is just a body massage for the public pain over this misunderstood war. I do hope it helps some in that regard, but there is nothing in it that is new. If it helps to get some more public support for what we are doing, then it has done it's job.
You have GOT to be kidding me. Did you even watch it? This was NOT intended to body massage public pain over the war. This is an attempt to go behind our President's back. Did you not hear O'Connor?
Are you ignorant of the recommendations made concerning Iran and Israel in this report?
Oh, and they started off by slamming "stay the course", so that dog don't hunt.
I haven't been able to read the thread either..but, I did just see the Dem Senators give a presser, where they all admitted that they haven't read the report...
They then proceeded to discuss all of the investigations into PRE-WAR intelligence and other things that the ARE going to do...
Yet, at the same time, Kennedy is on the Senate floor saying how great and important the ISG report IS, and needs to be followed.
I feel that the dems don't care about this at all...they have their agenda, and that is to impeach Pres. Bush, maybe not literally, because they can't start an impeachment..but that is what they want.
The GOP are too weakened to do anything...
The gist I got from the presser with the ISG was that THEIR main goal was to get "concensus" and "bipartisanship"...and I will say, that is NOT going to happen.
Therefore it was a waste of time and money for the whole thing.
I readily admit I am extremely upset at what I just heard at that news conference .. and I will take some time off to calm now and think more clearly
But I will say this much ... imo .. that press conference was a Cronkite moment
But O'Cornor said it ... she told the media it was up to them to read the report and interrupt it to the public
I don't know how to fight against this .. I don't know how to fix the mess and I truly fear for our future
IMO .. this is 1938 with nukes and a media acting like it's the end of Vietnam
1. We've been screwed since the Pubbies blew the election.
2. The report does not seem all that offensive with the exception of its implied threat to Israel.
3. And, you can rely on the MSM to spin it as a defeat for the president.
Improved/increased training and indoctrination for Iraqis at all levels and in all functions seems a no brainer - its their country & we don't want to be manning check points into the next decade.
'Diplomacy' toward Syria and Iran should, in my version, concentrate on the many reasons they'd be better off not interfering.
Return of the Golan Heights should NOT be a part of those reasons but it has been on the burner since Hizbola added it to their list during the last dust up. [I expect that any such references are based on the predilections of panel members and not on any 'Iraqi Studies' they took part in.]
Yes, the war in Iraq is over, yes, it has been a low casualty operation, and yes, the administration failed miserably in maintaining public support / the MSM and Dems have acted according to what their old timers learned from Vietnam.
What I sense is that the Dems will now put on their soft and cuddly face, change some rhetoric, and 'stay the course' while the media campaigns for them on how things got all better after they hauled in congress.