OT: Iraq timetable

[ProSense]

October 22, 2006

U.S. to Hand Iraq a New Timetable on Security Role

By DAVID S. CLOUD

WASHINGTON, Oct. 21 — The Bush administration is drafting a timetable for the Iraqi government to address sectarian divisions and assume a larger role in securing the country, senior American officials said.

Details of the blueprint, which is to be presented to Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki before the end of the year and would be carried out over the next year and beyond, are still being devised. But the officials said that for the first time Iraq was likely to be asked to agree to a schedule of specific milestones, like disarming sectarian militias, and to a broad set of other political, economic and military benchmarks intended to stabilize the country.

Although the plan would not threaten Mr. Maliki with a withdrawal of American troops, several officials said the Bush administration would consider changes in military strategy and other penalties if Iraq balked at adopting it or failed to meet critical benchmarks within it.

Snip...

The plan also moves the administration closer to an idea advocated by many Democrats, who have called for setting a date for beginning phased withdrawals of American troops from Iraq as a way to compel Iraq’s government to resolve its internal divisions and take on more responsibility.

more...

So far support for a timetable is limited to Kerry, Feingold and the 11 Democrats who voted for their bill. Does this mean there are more?

[Mass]

1. No, most democrats agree with a timetable - They refuse a deadline for

withdrawal.

The US governement has already used timetables for many different events: vote for a parliament, for a constitution, ... They also refuse to define when they will withdraw.

What makes Kerry/Feingold particular is the target date for a (nearly) full withdrawal.

[ProSense]

2. IMO, a timetable is not open-ended,

it has a deadline. The Levin amendment proposed withdrawal on no set timetable:

Our amendment does not establish a fixed ending date for redeployment. It doesn't set out fixed milestones once the phased redeployment has begun. So while it does not establish a timetable, it does establish a fixed, but not precipitous, time for the beginning of a phased redeployment--by the end of this year.

Beginning the phased redeployment of American troops in 2006 would send a very clear message to the Iraqis: We have been in Iraq over 3 years. We have lost 2,500 brave Americans and suffered more than seven times that number of casualties to make it possible for Iraq to become a free Nation. You, the Iraqis, must now decide whether you want a civil war or a nation.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2006_record&page=S6205&position=all

Clinton moved further away:

Now, that doesn't mean initially, out of Iraq. It could be just moving to the North, because I do think we have an extra obligation to the Kurds not to desert them once again. It could certainly mean just over the horizon in Kuwait. But what we've been doing is not working.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2879856&mesg_id=2879856

[Mass]

3. I am sure in their heart, the dems want a deadline, but they are

not ready to say so.

[sandnsea]

4. Kerry proposed benchmarks a long time ago

It was only after the benchmark approach was rejected, and Iraq deteriorated even further, that he moved to a withdrawal deadline. People now have it in their minds that there should be a date that we get out, an exact time. So that aspect of proposing a deadline has worked. A timeline would have an end to it, which would be a sort of deadline. So this is really what Kerry proposed at least last year for sure.

[cadmium]

5. debate with Warner

was a turning point signal. In no way did Warner have to grant JK a one on one debate, but he did. So even back in June he was taking this proposal seriously

[sandnsea]

6. The Georgetown speech

Oct 2005, when he launched his Home for the Holidays campaign and they began spouting "cut and run".

"The way forward in Iraq is not to pull out precipitously or merely promise to stay “as long as it takes.” To undermine the insurgency, we must instead simultaneously pursue both a political settlement and the withdrawal of American combat forces linked to specific, responsible benchmarks. At the first benchmark, the completion of the December elections, we can start the process of reducing our forces by withdrawing 20,000 troops over the course of the holidays."

So here they are, a year later. Even if they implement a benchmark strategy, they'll screw it up. And in another year, they'll be setting a deadline to get out. *sigh*

Edit for link:
http://kerry.senate.gov/v3/cfm/record.cfm?id=247764

[cadmium]

7. The Georgetown Speech got a lot of them

really making fun of the Democrats--and in fact a lot of Democrats making fun of the 20000 home for the holidays proposal.

The reason I want to make sure people dont forget the Warner - Kerry Colloquy is because it was a turning point in Republican military opinion. A lot of Democrats were still against a timetable. Even Paul Reickoff was on Rachel Maddow saying Kerry's plan was ridiculous and that we couldnt leave now. Warner has respect from a lot of Republicans as the chair of the Armed Services committee and former Sec of the Navy serious respect of the military. They respect Warner in a way they don't respect many others. Warner showed JK a lot of respect by having the colloquy, hearing him out, and making sure that he said, in the course of the debate-for all to hear, that he knew Kerry served honorably.

[TayTay]

9. Also, in the Q&A section of the 12/8/05 speech

given to the Council on Foreign Relations, Sen Kerry says that if he had his way, there would only be 30,000 to 40,000 troops left in Iraq by Christmas '06.

I wish someone had listened to him. He has had a consistent plan and has looked at benchmarks, the biggest and most important being the Grand Mosque blowing up in Samarra and the inevitability of civil war. That is what precipitated the much, much stronger language Kerry used in April and has used ever since.

Ah, civil war is a big damn benchmark, if you ask me.

[cadmium]

11. Is there video out there of this? n/t

[fedupinBushcountry]

8. Warner has to figure out

if he plans to keep protecting the war profiteers ( Halliburton, Titan, CACI, etc.)or the soldiers. He is in up to this knee deep and he knows it , watch Iraq for Sale, you can purchase it here http://iraqforsale.org/ only takes about 3 days to get it. I use to have a little respect for him, but no more, what he has done makes me sick.

Kerry's plan has always been the best plan, and each day this administration has done nothing and Republicans have sat on their hands for their campaign donors. That is wrong, they have left the troops in a situation that they knew had failed and all for money.

So now they are saying this, oh yeah 2 weeks before an election, we cannot let them get away with it, for if we do it will be the same more of the same all talk no action.

[cadmium]

10. I haven't watched yet

I'll have to order a couple copies today. I keep meaning to and keep forgetting to.

re Warner--I don't mean to sound like I am building him up---I am realistic about these people. I think Warner's change of sentiment (and obvious respect he showed JK) is a sentinel shift military connected Washington.

Thanks for the link--will order http://iraqforsale.org today

[fedupinBushcountry]

12. Oh I know

I was just sounding off, he happens to be my Senator along with barfbag Allen. It just angers me to see how they have sold the souls of soldiers for nothing more then political power and the money that backs it. It disgusts me.