Newest Hot Topic: How to Disengage in Iraq -NYT

[Rose Siding]

Three weeks before the election in Iraq, conversation has started bubbling up in Congress, in the Pentagon and some days even in the White House about when and how American forces might begin to disengage in Iraq.

So far it is mostly talk, not planning. The only thing resembling a formal map to the exit door are a series of Pentagon contingency plans for events after the Jan. 30 elections. But one senior administration official warned over the weekend against reading too much into that, saying "the Pentagon has plans for everything," from a new Korean war to relief missions in Africa.

The rumblings about disengagement have grown distinctly louder as members of Congress return from their districts, and as military officers try to game out how Sunni Arabs and Shiites might react to the election results. The annual drafting of the budget is a reminder that the American presence in Iraq is costing $4.5 billion a month and putting huge strains on the military. And, of course, White House officials contemplate the political costs of a second term dominated by a nightly accounting of continuing casualties.

By all accounts, President Bush has not joined the conversation about disengagement so far, though a few senior members of his national security team have.
...
But the president's optimism is in sharp contrast, some administration insiders say, to some conversations taking place in the White House Situation Room, in the Pentagon and in Congress. For the first time, there are questions about whether it is politically possible to wait until the Iraqi forces are sufficiently trained before pressure to start bringing back American troops becomes overwhelming.

Some senators are now openly declaring that Iraqi military and police units are not up to the job. ...MORE...

http://nytimes.com/2005/01/10/politics/10policy.html?hp&ex=1105333200&en=7d13f0c616bda451&ei=5094&partner=homepage

[sam sarrha]

1. we could just be nice to the UN and they might take it over

[NNN0LHI]

17. Why? Do you think the Iraqis will like our troops better in blue helmets?

I wish it would work, but I wouldn't bet no money on it.

Don

[KlatooBNikto]

2. Vietnamization in the desert. As usual the Iraqis on our side will be the

cowards while the brave Iraqis will be on the other side. That seems to be a constant.

[RaleighNCDUer]

6. I don't think the problem is that 'our' Iraqis are cowardly.

They just don't see much point in killing or being killed by their countrymen to support the American agenda, while the other side, naturally enough, sees them as being the American agenda.

That's why vietnamization didn't work, either.

I don't doubt that there are Iraqis on both sides (and there are 2 sides, because it already is a civil war) who want to see democracy. The pro-democracy insurgents just don't see the US offering it, and are forced to work with anti-democracy allies. Just as pro-democracy Cubans were forced to work with Castro because we considered all rebels to be the same.

I say get out, let them sort it out, and pay the bills for the rebuilding.

[MichiganVote]

3. Iraqi's not up to the job? Where the hell have you been people?

Any kid with a computer and a news channel has figured that one out.

Bush game plan

(1. Start false war on false threats

(2. Initiate false temprorary government

(3. Support training for Iraqi's who claim false loyalty to US

(4. Concoct false claims against UN

(5. Have false elections in Iraq

(6. Continue to provide false casualty numbers

(7. Declare false victory

(8. Promote false withdrawl

(9. Deny false reports of low military numbers

(10. Wash, rinse, repeat false assurances

[oblivious]

4. If they leave, how will they justify keeping the bases?

11. Assure false support for the Iraqi people by retaining the right to bomb them to smithereens whenever necessary.

[MichiganVote]

19. You got it. One case of falsies fits all.

[LynnTheDem]

5. Notice the last sentance?

Gen. Tommy R. Franks, who commanded the invasion of Iraq, said on the NBC News program "Today" on Dec. 9:

"One has to think about the numbers. I think we will be engaged with our military in Iraq for, perhaps, 3, 5, perhaps 10 years."

[shadowknows69]

8. Fu*k that

10 years? GW and company are trying to break all records the vietnam wart set apparently

[Just Me]

15. The neoCONimperialists want PERMANENT military presence.

Of course, they're not going to tell the American people about that part of their plan.

[shadowknows69]

7. i'll bet if we left

the iraqi security forces would get "up" to the job pretty quick.

[poe]

9. leave now america

there seems to be a premise even in much of the "liberal" analysis that the us of A has a right to be in iraq or anywhere/everywhere for that matter. get out- beat it- scram. make sure you take england with you. you brought us saddam-you've beaten democracy into us-you were kind enough to ruin our land with your nuclear waste- torture us- murder our children- poison our water. now leave. who are you western man with all the blood on your hands (we know about sand creek massacre and wounded knee) to tell any people how to live. over 2 million killed (at least) in the last thirteen years-go away. we will take our chances with civil war.

[daleo]

10. Their problem is: if they do disengage, what was the point of it all?

Of course if they don't disengage, the disaster just continues. That's how you get into a quagmire. It still amazes me that Bush got back into power - it must have been thievery, a population couldn't possibly be this stupid.

[leftchick]

12. it was indeed stolen...

spend some time in the 2004 election forum and you will know howthey did it again.
:(

[Supersedeas]

16. the point comes after the dollar sign, the billions make by Def Contractor

Do they think the invasion was worth it? Chaaa-Ching!!!

[leftchick]

11. They Don't WANT to 'Disengage'! But if they did, here is how.....

The Best plan I have seen to getthefuckoutathere....

5 Steps Out of Iraq

As Larry Diamond, who worked as a senior adviser to the Coalition Provisional Authority, has noted, “There are really no good options,” at this point. But there are better options than the policies being currently pursued. The following five steps would lessen the violence and insecurity in Iraq:

1. Decrease US troops and end offensive operations: As a first step to withdrawal, the US should declare an immediate cease-fire and reduce the number of troops deployed in Iraq. Instead, the Bush administration has done the opposite, increasing the number of troops stationed there by 12,000. Increased offensive operations will only escalate the violence and make Iraq less secure and less safe. The US should pull troops out of major cities so that greater manpower can be directed to guarding the borders to stem the flow of foreign fighters and money being used to fund the resistance. If Iraqi security forces need assistance maintaining order, they have the option of inviting in regional forces, as proposed by Saudi Arabia. They could also reinstate the former Iraqi army, which was well-trained, after purging upper-level Saddam supporters and providing additional counterinsurgency training to deal with the current war. Once implemented, these measures would allow for total withdrawal of US forces.



2. Declare that the US has no intention to maintain a permanent or long-term military presence or bases in Iraq: Congress needs to make clear that it is committed to the principle of responsible withdrawal of all US troops from Iraq. By making this statement through a congressional resolution, the US would openly acknowledge that it has no interest in controlling Middle Eastern oil or in suppressing Muslims, hence depriving insurgents of their central organizing message. Without such a resolution, Iraqis have little reason to believe that our present actions are nothing greater than a plan to establish a long-term military presence in Iraq and make the occupation a permanent feature of Iraqi life.

3. Do more to restore services: Moving control of reconstruction from the Defense Department to the State Department has been a positive step as it removes an agency designed to fight war from the much different task of nation building. But a much stronger statement to the Iraqi people would be to go even further and give Iraqis direct authority over reconstruction funding. The US government and its contractors have failed to restore public services and public safety, strengthen institutions, or provide jobs. Meanwhile, billions of appropriated dollars remain unspent. By giving Iraqis control over reconstruction funds, more Iraqis will get jobs and projects will be better targeted to the needs of Iraqis. And lowering the unemployment rate will weaken the potential for recruitment into the insurgency.

[Skidmore]

13. To be replaced soon by a newer hot topic---

how to engage in Iran. Coming to a theater near you.

[henslee]

14. Let's just cut a deal with Bin Laden. It already feels like we have. And

bolstering the idea is that recent post about the CIA analyst who described the fallout likely to occur if we take OBL out... We could not hve screwed this situation up any more than we have.

[calimary]

18. Pretty sad when this is a subject headlined as a "hot topic."

Robert Downey Junior once was asked to define "hot." His response: "destined to be cold."

bush of course can't be expected to join in. After all, there's no face-saving potential here. Can't have the poor dear being forced to admit he'd made a mistake, now, can we?

I have a solution. Declare victory. Then pull our troops OUT. Period. Why don't we just say we won? Everything else about this abortion has been a lie, so why not the "end" of it, too? There'd be about 59 million bible-thumpers and gay-haters and Clinton-bashers and other assorted idiots who'd buy it as blindly as they do everything else that comes out of this regime's collective mouth. They can be counted on not to question it like good little lemmings. It's against their good republi-CON holier-than-thou family values, anyway.

What difference does it make now? Let's just make it up. It would at least be consistent.