The American public wants a timeline for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq. In response, the Bush administration has started throwing around terms like “timeline” and “timetable.”Unfortunately, this rhetoric is not accompanied by any change in strategy. The Iraqis have agreed to a 12-18 month “timeline” to control violence in Iraq. But if they don’t meet the benchmarks they’ve agreed to, there are no consequences. The “timeline” is disconnected from a drawdown of U.S. troops.
Casey noted, “I said a year or so ago that if the conditions on the ground continued the way they were going, that I thought we’d have fairly substantial reductions in coalition forces.” That plan was thrown out in “early July.”
Casey made it clear that if the latest effort to get the Iraqis to assume more responsibility doesn’t work out, he’s ready to reinvent the wheel again. This is the same approach the Bush administration has been pursuing for more than three years. Staying the course provides very little incentive for Iraqis to assume control of their own security problems.
LSB: So, the Bush regime has started throwing around terms like “timeline” and “timetable.” Reminder: On July 27, 2005 Feingold introduced Senate Resolution 171 that called on the President to create a timeline for achieving clear and coherent goals in Iraq. Three weeks later Feingold proposed a gradual withdraw of U.S. troops from Iraq, with December 31, 2006 as the target date for military completion in Iraq. So, other than the semantics, how is this "new" tactic by the Bushites any different than ‘Stay the Course’?
No comments:
Post a Comment