Troop reductions in Iraq could begin just in time for mid-terms

[Joe Republic]

Source

Hadley: Iraq Drawdown Could Come in '06

December 5, 2005, 8:11 AM EST

WASHINGTON -- The United States may be ready to reduce troops in Iraq next year if Iraqis continue making progress at the current rate, President Bush's national security adviser said Sunday.

Stephen Hadley appeared on a round of Sunday talk shows to follow up on President Bush's speech on Iraq from the U.S. Naval Academy last week. Hadley echoed Bush's statement that decisions about troop withdrawals would be made when U.S. commanders there felt Iraqis were ready to govern and protect themselves without U.S. help, but said that could come as early as 2006.

"We think that if trends continue and we continue to make the progress and the Iraqis continue to make the progress we're making, we'll be in a position sometime next year for us to -- for the commanders on the ground to make their assessments," Hadley said on ABC's "This Week." "And it may be at that point they will come to the president and say, we want to make some adjustments."

Hadley said the deaths in Iraq, now above 2,100, have been very difficult for the president. Still, he said Bush expects insurgent attacks will increase in the next couple of weeks before Iraq's Dec. 15 elections.

Hadley was repeatedly asked on "Fox News Sunday" whether Vice President Dick Cheney was wrong when he said last May that the insurgency was in its last throes, but he would not directly answer. "Clearly, there's a lot more work to do," he said.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said he also thinks it is possible to bring U.S. troops home in the next year or two, "but it's going to be tough." He said one of the biggest mistakes that the Bush administration made in fighting the war was to have too few troops in Iraq.

"We've made serious mistakes, and I'm frustrated by them, and most Americans are, too," McCain said on "Meet the Press." "But most Americans, I think, still appreciate that if we had some kind of premature withdrawal that the consequences would be very severe."

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard Lugar, R-Ind., said Bush has an uphill struggle to convince Americans that he can be successful in Iraq. He said civil war there is possible. "That would be catastrophic, not only for Iraq but the Middle East and for our interests," Lugar said.

Some Democrats criticized Bush for not being more aggressive about troops withdrawals.

Bush's former campaign rival, Sen. John Kerry said it's more dangerous for the mission to keep troops in Iraq in such large numbers. The Massachusetts Democrat has called for Bush to bring home 20,000 troops if the December elections are successful and he said Sunday that there should also be a political summit in the region immediately.

Kerry said if he would not have voted for the resolution authorizing war if he knew then what he knows now.

"They misled us and misled the nation," Kerry said.

[TheresNoMoney]

I thought the Democrats "hated America" since they want a phased withdrawal plan?

If the Republicans do it, will they also "hate America"?

[A18]

Actually, the debate was over a fixed time table.

[TheresNoMoney]

Actually, the debate was over a fixed time table.

No, it wasn't. Until Jack Murtha, no Democrat called for a fixed timetable.

[A18]

Where did a Republican say that a phased pull-out would be a bad idea, no matter when it is done?

[opebo]

Perhaps the early stages of an ignominious withdrawal coupled with some good work by the heroic Resistance around the mid-terms will harm the Republicans.

[MODU]

Actually, the debate was over a fixed time table.

No, it wasn't. Until Jack Murtha, no Democrat called for a fixed timetable.

Uh, yeah they have.

And, as far back as the beginning of 2004, it was discussed that there would be phased drawdowns following the election of the first Constitutional government . . . if the situation within the nation was stable enough to support a drawdown of forces.

[Blue Rectangle]

I thought the Democrats "hated America" since they want a phased withdrawal plan?

If the Republicans do it, will they also "hate America"?

Dean was nice enough to provide a clear difference between the two parties on the Iraq issue:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[MODU]

I thought the Democrats "hated America" since they want a phased withdrawal plan?

If the Republicans do it, will they also "hate America"?

Dean was nice enough to provide a clear difference between the two parties on the Iraq issue:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Gotta love the Defeatism Mentallity of the Democratic elite.

[opebo]

I thought the Democrats "hated America" since they want a phased withdrawal plan?

If the Republicans do it, will they also "hate America"?

Dean was nice enough to provide a clear difference between the two parties on the Iraq issue:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Gotta love the Defeatism Mentallity of the Democratic elite.

What 'Defeatism'?   We're just beginning to see Victory in our sights - over this Hitleresque invasion.

[Blue Rectangle]

I thought the Democrats "hated America" since they want a phased withdrawal plan?

If the Republicans do it, will they also "hate America"?

Dean was nice enough to provide a clear difference between the two parties on the Iraq issue:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Gotta love the Defeatism Mentallity of the Democratic elite.

What 'Defeatism'?   We're just beginning to see Victory in our sights - over this Hitleresque invasion.

Excellent point.  Yes, Dean is campaigning for Saddam's victory over the U.S.

[opebo]

Excellent point.  Yes, Dean is campaigning for Saddam's victory over the U.S.

As he should be.  Saddam - and his nation - were attacked without provocation.  Do you support mugging just because it was your cousin that did it, Blue Rectangle?

[MODU]

Excellent point.  Yes, Dean is campaigning for Saddam's victory over the U.S.

As he should be.  Saddam - and his nation - were attacked without provocation.  Do you support mugging just because it was your cousin that did it, Blue Rectangle?

You forget, my son, that we have been at war with Iraq since 1991, when Saddam violated the cease fire.  To say they were attacked without provocation is to ignore reality.  He invaded a sovereign nation, pulling us into war.  It just took us 12 years to finish what he started.

[opebo]

Excellent point.  Yes, Dean is campaigning for Saddam's victory over the U.S.

As he should be.  Saddam - and his nation - were attacked without provocation.  Do you support mugging just because it was your cousin that did it, Blue Rectangle?

You forget, my son, that we have been at war with Iraq since 1991, when Saddam violated the cease fire.  To say they were attacked without provocation is to ignore reality.  He invaded a sovereign nation, pulling us into war.  It just took us 12 years to finish what he started.

Interesting technicalities, though 1) the 'cease fire' imposed invasive rules that were untenable and destructive of iraqi sovereignty, and 2) there is no reason that the 'job' of ejecting someone from a third country by definition requires invasion of the foe to 'finish'.

[Blue Rectangle]

Excellent point.  Yes, Dean is campaigning for Saddam's victory over the U.S.

As he should be.  Saddam - and his nation - were attacked without provocation.  Do you support mugging just because it was your cousin that did it, Blue Rectangle?

That's a poor analogy.  Saddam is not the victim of any crime that he had not already committed.  It is amusing, in a black humor sort of way, to hear Saddam complain about the violation of his sovereignty.  For decades, Saddam's sovereignty was guaranteed solely by force.  Now the tables are turned and Saddam's opinion on the concept of "Might makes Right" have made a 180 degree turn.

[opebo]

Excellent point.  Yes, Dean is campaigning for Saddam's victory over the U.S.

As he should be.  Saddam - and his nation - were attacked without provocation.  Do you support mugging just because it was your cousin that did it, Blue Rectangle?

That's a poor analogy.  Saddam is not the victim of any crime that he had not already committed.

So, you're saying that a person who has ever mugged is fair game for mugging the rest of his life?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, all sovereignty is guaranteed solely by force, Rectangle. 

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I thought the Democrats "hated America" since they want a phased withdrawal plan?

If the Republicans do it, will they also "hate America"?

Dean was nice enough to provide a clear difference between the two parties on the Iraq issue:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Gotta love the Defeatism Mentallity of the Democratic elite.

What 'Defeatism'?   We're just beginning to see Victory in our sights - over this Hitleresque invasion.

Excellent point.  Yes, Dean is campaigning for Saddam's victory over the U.S.

Impossible, since Saddam will likely be executed soon and there is virutally no chance of him ever being back in power.

Saddam can't win anymore, but neither can the US. Even if we "win", all it means installing a disgusting Shiite Islamist government friendly to Iran. No Americans should die for the current pieces of human garbage running Iraq. We should pull all troops out, after having special forces take out al-Jaafari and Ali Sistaini.

[Blue Rectangle]

Excellent point.  Yes, Dean is campaigning for Saddam's victory over the U.S.

As he should be.  Saddam - and his nation - were attacked without provocation.  Do you support mugging just because it was your cousin that did it, Blue Rectangle?

That's a poor analogy.  Saddam is not the victim of any crime that he had not already committed.

So, you're saying that a person who has ever mugged is fair game for mugging the rest of his life?

Like I said, it's a poor analogy.  If you insist on using it, then maybe a more accurate representation of what I said is that I would have little sympathy for a knife-weilding mugger who gets his head blown off one day by an intended victim.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, all sovereignty is guaranteed solely by force, Rectangle. 

Then Saddam's previous sovereignty in Iraq and our current control are morally equivalent, right?  How can you claim that one is superior to the other?

[Democratic Hawk]

Not sure if this is grounds for cynicism or optimism

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

Excellent point.  Yes, Dean is campaigning for Saddam's victory over the U.S.

As he should be

Opebo,

You're a lousy excuse for an American

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

Gotta love the Defeatism Mentallity of the Democratic elite.

It makes me wanna bleeding weep

Dave

[ATFFL]

Not sure if this is grounds for cynicism or optimism

Dave

Yes, it is.

[TheresNoMoney]

Excellent point.  Yes, Dean is campaigning for Saddam's victory over the U.S.

Saddam is behind bars, you dolt.

[Blue Rectangle]

Excellent point.  Yes, Dean is campaigning for Saddam's victory over the U.S.

Saddam is behind bars, you dolt.

So was Nelson Mandela, Vladimir Lenin, and countless other men who went on to rule countries.   Heck, Saddam was sentenced to death by the government of Iraq back in the 60s and was jailed, then he escaped and went on to become president.

[TheresNoMoney]

Call me crazy, but I highly doubt Saddam is going anywhere, except when they put him to death.