Gen. Casey offers up the outline for a timetable

[ProSense]

Wednesday :: Aug 30, 2006

Using General Casey's Prediction To Help Democrats

by Steve Soto

I’ve said this before and I’ll say this again. Getting into an argument with Bush and Cheney about firing Rummy or a troop withdrawal timeline is a futile exercise, because a) he won’t fire Rummy, and b) he won’t be pushed into withdrawing troops while he is in office. Just yesterday, Bush said again that he won’t let public opinion dictate his Iraq policy, and continues to indicate that there won't be a major withdrawal on his watch, (as that would be a sign of a failed policy,) unless the generals on the ground support it.

Today, General George Casey helped put some parameters around our commitment when he said:

"I don't have a date, but I can see over the next 12 to 18 months, the Iraqi security forces progressing to a point where they can take on the security responsibilities for the country, with very little coalition support,"

As the story notes, this does not mean that US forces can come home when Iraqi forces have taken over, as we are planning to move into large bases and provide support for the Iraqi security forces. But it does mean that Casey believes our presence can be reduced beginning 12-18 months down the road as the Iraqis approach self-sufficiency. And as Bush has said many times, the generals on the ground will dictate the timeline, and we will leave when the Iraqis are ready. Regardless of whether or not Bush can be trusted on that, Casey affirmed again today that 12-18 months from now, it will be the Iraqis that govern when we go and how much of an American presence remains.

Casey gave a progress report today on how the Iraqis are doing in successfully completing a three-step process:

1. Training and equipping Iraqi forces: apparently completed.
2. "Put them in the lead, still with our support": 75% completed
3. Provide security themselves: sometime after the 12-18 months.

If you read closely what Casey is saying, the Administration is calling the shots for the next 12-18 months, while the Iraqis complete Step Two and while we work towards helping them build the intelligence, logistical, and medical infrastructure to sustain themselves independently. At that point, three “Friedmans” from now in early 2008, the Bush Administration would be accountable for delivering Iraq to the Iraqis and a significant draw down of our troops. What Casey has done today is provide the measuring stick Democrats can use hang future slippage and failure around Bush’s neck. Both the Administration and the Iraqis are claiming, contrary to facts on the ground, that things are getting better. If so, and that is a specious claim, then Casey’s timeline plays into that nonsense, regardless of whether or not it is true.

It doesn’t take 135,000 American soldiers to build the intelligence, logistical, and medical infrastructure called for in Step Three. And if Casey is saying today that the Iraqis are 75% of the way to completing Step Two, then Democrats are in a position to hold the Administration accountable for a significant withdrawal beginning a year from now. Failure to do so can be hung around Bush and McCain’s neck as a sign of GOP failure heading into the 2008 elections.

more...

http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/008597.php

[sandnsea]

1. "brigades begin pulling out"

"early next year"

This is what Casey said a year ago. So no, I don't put any weight in his withdrawal timelines. If we don't start defining the benchmarks and the dates, we'll never get out of there. They've been promising to withdraw troops "after the election" since 2004.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/11/18/iraq.plan/

[ProSense]

2. True!

I think the blog entry recognizes that it's BS.

The Bush admin is spinning as fast as they can.


Iraqis want them out:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2804530&mesg_id=2804530