A Rush to War—Now a Rush Out of One? -- Joe Klein

[Khephra]

On Oct. 19, 1966, a year after heavy combat in Vietnam had begun, a 74-year-old Republican Senator from Vermont named George Aiken proposed an immediate solution to the conflict: the U.S. should declare victory and go home. And now, suddenly, there are Aikenesque rumblings about Iraq—from liberals and conservatives, politicians and policy experts alike. There is gathering political, military and diplomatic pressure to find an Iraqi exit strategy by next spring. Given Iraq's fragility, any perceived weakening of American resolve could lead to disaster. Even so, don't be surprised if some modified, fig-leafed version of the Aiken scenario comes to pass.

The political pressures are obvious. There will be a presidential election in November 2004. The public is already weary of the costs of war and skeptical about the reasons George W. Bush chose to fight it. The highest-ranking U.S. general in Iraq, Ricardo Sanchez, last week admitted that the Iraqi guerrillas were growing more effective and predicted even more lethal attacks in the near future. Bush has not helped matters with his continuing spew of stiff-necked platitudes, but he has been resolute, so far, about American postwar responsibilities. "We have a moral responsibility to leave Iraq better than we found it,” a high-ranking Administration official told me last week. Morals often take a backseat to practicalities in the heat of an election, though, and one wonders whether the Democrats will resist the easy demagoguery of a Bring 'Em Home Now campaign.

The military pressures are quite serious. The Army will face a troop-replacement crisis in March, when several units are scheduled to rotate home. A few weeks ago, the Congressional Budget Office found that the Army would be able to maintain a force of only 67,000 to 106,000 troops after that, unless the tours of the 150,000 currently serving in Iraq are extended or significant numbers of National Guards, reservists and Marines are rotated in or significant foreign help is found, which is unlikely. "We'll get it done somehow,” a military source told me, with a sigh. But the long-term damage to U.S. military readiness—and national security—could be serious. "We can't sustain these troop levels for more than another year or so,” an Administration official told me.

more................

http://www.time.com/time/columnist/klein/article/0,9565,493243,00.html

[blm]

1. This is a must read.

They are quite capable of this scenario.