Welcome to ASFN Fan Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
REPORT: Six Months Later, Time’s Up For Escalation Proponents
Six months ago today, on January 10, 2007, the President announced his policy of escalation in Iraq. He claimed that “if we increase our support at this crucial moment, and help the Iraqis break the current cycle of violence, we can hasten the day our troops begin coming home.”
A host of administration officials and media pundits quickly embraced Bush’s call, and asked that the American public give it a chance to succeed. Building off the work that has been done by Atrios and others, ThinkProgress has compiled a list of administration officials and media pundits who promised a reassessment after giving the surge a chance. Some examples:
Quote:
CONDOLEEZZA RICE: So it’s not as if there is a date, at six months we’ll know and then we have to do something dramatic. [Time Magazine, 1/12/07]
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: I think we ought to give him and the president the benefit of the doubt, give them six months and see if it can be controlled. [Fox News, 1/12/07]
BILL O’REILLY: We can’t force these people to stop killing each other. They’re either going to do it or they’re not, but now they know. Now they know. They’ve got six months and that’s it. [The O’Reilly Factor, 1/24/07]
Six months later, the cycle of violence in Iraq continues. Since Bush announced the escalation, 590 U.S. soldiers and tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians have died. Military assessments suggest that “the U.S. military’s plan to secure Baghdad against a rising insurgency is falling far short of its goal” and “no progress has been made on the political benchmarks the Iraqi government was supposed to have met already.”
Bush’s escalation has failed, and time is up for the following list of people. Read the report HERE, and let us know if there’s someone we missed.
Oops.
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
I'm guessing that the "oops" is in response to the "six months" comments and how it has been six months and nothing has gotten better?
Right... As usual, I guess it's a matter of who's defining "better"... Rather than Petreus or others actually on the ground, let's have ThinkProgress define "better" for us...
Right... As usual, I guess it's a matter of who's defining "better"... Rather than Petreus or others actually on the ground, let's have ThinkProgress define "better" for us...
Has Petreus said that things are getting better?
Believe me I don't put much stock into blogs or political sites, but have things gotten better? I honestly don't know what or who to believe anymore.
__________________ "I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy".
Believe me I don't put much stock into blogs or political sites, but have things gotten better? I honestly don't know what or who to believe anymore.
I haven't been over to Baghdad lately so honestly, I don't know either... And I don't believe Petreus has weighed in at all on the topic of "better" or not "better". Why would he? The man is in the heat of battle, doing all he can to make it "better"... His charge was to report back in September, yet, for some reason people feel compelled to jump the gun and declare defeat before those on the ground have actually had the chance to report back... Strange huh?
Here's a list of the republican senators I expect to get on board with the phased withdrawal of troops from Iraq due to the failure of the "surge" via the Levin/Reed Proposal:
Jeff Session of AL
Ted Stevens, AK
Saxby Chambliss, GA
Larry Craig, ID
Pat Roberts, KS
Susan Collins, ME
Norman Coleman, MN
Thad Cochran, MS Chuck Hagel, NB - already on board John Sununu, NH Pete Domenici, NM - already on board
Elizabeth Dole, NC
James Inhofe, OK Gordon Smith, OR - already on board, calls war insane
Lindsey Graham, SC
Lamar Alexander, TN
John Cornyn, TX
John Warner, VA
Michael Enzi, WY
More republican defectors on the Iraq war who are all, coincidentally up for re-election in 2008:
GOP senators call for Iraq change now
By ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer 6 minutes ago
Several Republican senators told President Bush's top national security aide privately Wednesday that they did not want Bush to wait until September to change course in Iraq.
The meeting that lawmakers had with national security adviser Stephen Hadley came as GOP Sens. Olympia Snowe and Chuck Hagel announced they would back Democratic legislation ordering combat to end next spring.
Republican support for the war has steadily eroded in recent weeks as the White House prepared an interim progress report that found that the U.S.-backed government in Baghdad has made little progress in meeting major targets of reform.
Of the GOP lawmakers who say the U.S. should reduce its military role in Iraq, nearly all are up for re-election in 2008.
"I'm hopeful they (the White House) change their minds," said Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M.
Domenici and at least five other Republicans support a bill by Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., that would adopt as U.S. policy the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group Report.
The bipartisan panel, led by Republican James A. Baker III and Democrat Lee Hamilton, said the U.S. should hand off the combat mission to the Iraqis, bolster diplomatic efforts in the region and pave the way for a drawdown of troops by spring 2008.
Domenici, who is expected to face voters next year, said he and other co-sponsors told Hadley the president shouldn't wait until September to adopt the bipartisan policy.
"The only difference of opinion at the moment is, the president wants to deal with the Baker-Hamilton recommendations in September," said Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., one of the first GOP co-sponsors.
"I think he should do that today because it develops a long-term strategy for what happens in the surge," added Alexander, who also is up for re-election. "It would put him and Congress on the same path, which is what we definitely need."
Members said Hadley did not indicate the White House would switch gears. Bush this week said he will not reconsider the military strategy in Iraq until Gen. David Petraeus, the U.S. military commander there, delivers his progress report in September.
"He was not in a position to do anything other than say 'I hear you,' " Domenici said of Hadley.
Other Republicans at the meeting did not call for immediate change, but offered tepid support for the current policy. Sen. Norm Coleman of Minnesota said he was seriously considering Salazar's legislation and remained gravely concerned about the lack of progress in Iraq.
"I'm still in the same place, and I don't think there were any hearts or minds changed in there," Coleman said upon leaving the meeting. Sen. John Warner, R-Va., who also attended the meeting, is expected to call for a change in Iraq policy after Bush releases on Thursday that interim report on Baghdad's political progress.
Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, a staunch supporter of Bush's Iraq policies, said he and many others would stick behind Bush. But "obviously everyone was concerned, and we're trying to figure out what the answer is," he said.
GOP support has become crucial as the Senate opened debate on a $649 billion defense policy bill.
The Senate on Wednesday voted against advancing a measure that would have restricted combat deployments by requiring that troops spend as much time at home as in battle. The 56-41 vote on the proposal by Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., fell four votes short of the 60 needed to cut off debate.
The Senate is expected to vote next week on an amendment by Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., that would order troop withdrawals to begin in 120 days and end all combat on April 30, 2008. The House plans to take up a similar measure on Thursday.
Levin's amendment is not expected to survive and Bush has vowed to veto it if it does. But in a signal of growing unease with the war, it has picked up at least one new vote from Snowe of Maine.
Snowe initially opposed setting a firm deadline, contending it would not make any sense to broadcast war plans to the enemy. But the senator, who is not up for re-election next year but faces a strong anti-war constituency, said she decided to switch her position because the situation has grown too dire.
"Frankly, given the fact that the Iraqi government isn't prepared to change its own political direction, we should be prepared to change course with respect to our strategy," Snowe told reporters Tuesday.
Hagel of Nebraska and Gordon Smith, R-Ore., also signed on as co-sponsors of the bill; both voted for a similar measure earlier this year.
Hadley's visit to Capitol Hill came as the White House finalized a 23-page progress report on Iraq that concludes the government in Baghdad has made little progress in meeting reform goals laid down by Bush and Congress.
The administration is likely to argue that some progress has been made in reducing the level of sectarian violence and militia control. Iraq also has established several, but not all, of the needed joint neighborhood security stations in Baghdad and has increased the number of capable Iraqi security units.
But the report also is expected to concede that several major goals have not been met, including agreement on new Iraqi laws to allocate oil and gas resources and revenue and to address amnesty for former Baath Party members. White House spokesman Tony Fratto said the report will indicate whether there has been "progress at a satisfactory rate, or unsatisfactory rate, and in some cases, maybe mixed results on some of those benchmarks." (This version CORRECTS to show that Sen. Olympia Snowe is not up for re-election as previously reported.)
I haven't been over to Baghdad lately so honestly, I don't know either... And I don't believe Petreus has weighed in at all on the topic of "better" or not "better". Why would he? The man is in the heat of battle, doing all he can to make it "better"... His charge was to report back in September, yet, for some reason people feel compelled to jump the gun and declare defeat before those on the ground have actually had the chance to report back... Strange huh?
Wasn't it just Petreus who came out and said that the Iraqis have failed so far to meet even one of the benchmarks?
That is a pretty clear indication that the surge has been a monumental failure thus far. I guess if you want to believe that its all going to magicall turnaround in 6weeks, then no, its not a failure yet.
But if the past 4years and 6months have not be evidence enough for you, I guess you will never see it.
Wasn't it just Petreus who came out and said that the Iraqis have failed so far to meet even one of the benchmarks?
That is a pretty clear indication that the surge has been a monumental failure thus far. I guess if you want to believe that its all going to magicall turnaround in 6weeks, then no, its not a failure yet.
But if the past 4years and 6months have not be evidence enough for you, I guess you will never see it.
Time to cut bait and run.
Flip flop.
Waffle.
In other words we should run for our lives, the Iraqi's lives are their own problem as it should have been from the start in that we shouldn't have gone there in the first place.
__________________
At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.
Since the President announced his plan to escalate the war in Iraq:
590 U.S. soldiers have died and 3,575 have been wounded in Iraq since January 10, 2007. [icasualties.org; 1/10/07-7/9/07]
Of the wounded, 1,672 suffer injuries too severe to return to duty.
At least 13,463 civilians and members of the Iraqi Security Forces have died since January 2007, according to media reports. [icasualties.org]
Nearly 11,000 people have been killed or wounded in multiple fatality bombings. [Brookings Institution, 7/5/07]
According to an internal military assessment, the U.S. military’s plan to secure Baghdad against a rising insurgency is falling far short of its goal. Fewer than one-third of Baghdad’s neighborhoods are under the control of U.S. and Iraqi forces. [New York Times, 6/4/07]
Wasn't it just Petreus who came out and said that the Iraqis have failed so far to meet even one of the benchmarks?
That is a pretty clear indication that the surge has been a monumental failure thus far. I guess if you want to believe that its all going to magicall turnaround in 6weeks, then no, its not a failure yet.
But if the past 4years and 6months have not be evidence enough for you, I guess you will never see it.
In other words we should run for our lives, the Iraqi's lives are their own problem as it should have been from the start in that we shouldn't have gone there in the first place.
Should've never been there in the fist place...
Too many factions at war, will never be solved even with US there... It going to be a free for all in Iraq when we leave if we leave 6 months or 15 years from now...
Bush plan has created unmitigated chaos in that part of the world and is only making it worse.
I am tired of our troops dying for this bull crap war "plan" just so neo cons around our country can spank one off.
Too many factions at war, will never be solved even with US there... It going to be a free for all in Iraq when we leave if we leave 6 months or 15 years from now...
Bush plan has created unmitigated chaos in that part of the world and is only making it worse.
I am tired of our troops dying for this bull crap war "plan" just so neo cons around our country can spank one off.
Yes I'm sure that's how it goes.
"look Papa everytime a solider dies another neo-con busts his nut"
__________________ "I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy".
Linear Mode
