What is your opinion of the Iraq Study Group report?

[WilliamPitt]

What do you think of the conclusions drawn?

What is your opinion of the political impact?

Have you read it yet? (I am still working through it)

Curious about the collective thoughts here. I don't have mine formulated yet.

EDIT: Check this out: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2868947

[truebrit71]

1. Where can you get a copy? Is it available online yet?

Until I've read it I can't really say...

[WilliamPitt]

4. .pdf on WaPo, here:

http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/pdf/iraqReport_120606_part1and2.pdf

[truebrit71]

28. Thanks.

eom

[Junkdrawer]

2. Sparosnare put it best...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2868116

[Nite Owl]

8. Yes he does:

There is nothing new in the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group. There is no plan for withdrawal. Let me repeat that - there is no plan for withdrawal. Bush may have to eat a bit of crow over his refusal to veer from his policies, but he now has the opportunity to appear bipartisan. Between now and when the new Democratic Congress takes office, the PR push to make the Bush Administration seem agreeable to change will be sickening. If they succeed in their propoganda, any investigations by Democrats will be painted as political and they'll whine and cry they are being attacked. They are setting us up to fail, and as always, looking towards the next election.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2868116




No plan for withdrawal and it gives validity to our staying and going there in the first place. All it doesn is extend the stay with a face of legitimacy.

[Poll_Blind]

3. Still reading too. Similarly-curious persons can download the...

...report here.

PB

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

5. My opinion...

is that it's utterly meaningless, that it will have no impact, and will be utterly forgotten in weeks.

No, I haven't read it yet.

[Cosmocat]

34. You mean, kind of like the 9-11 commission ...

The 9-11 commission was more controlled than this one was, with CLEAR unstated directives on what could and could not be addressed ... And, this crew did absolutely NOTHING with it ...

What makes people think for one minute they will do anything with this report ???

[mike_c]

6. I haven't had a chance to read it yet....

I'm in my busiest week of the semester and won't be able to read it until next week at the earliest. However, my considered opinion is that there is no way "forward" in Iraq and that the U.S. should admit failure and withdraw as soon as possible-- certainly within a couple of months at the latest. Had we set a six month or even a one year timetable back when those ideas were first floated we would be long gone from Iraq now. Instead, we're mired more deeply than ever. Nothing but a speedy withdrawal will get us out or get the Iraqis back on track to undoing the damage the U.S. has done to their nation.

[Hubert Flottz]

7. A political play put on by the GawdPoppy to save the evil one!

Another taxpayer ripoff! STAGECRAFT!

They studied long but they studied wrong...I believe they had reached the same conclusions the first day they met, that they reported today! Project Cover Junior's Ass!

[Skittles]

9. they sent the big guys in to bail Junior out once again

doesn't matter what it says, he will ignore it out of sheer spite

[katty]

40. and still the boy is an ungrateful wretch!! get rid of the kid!

[tularetom]

10. It doesn't sound like the conclusions are drastically different

from what's taking place now. But it's being characterized (at least on MSNBC) as an unprecedented slap in the face of an amurkin president so the public is apt to come away with the impression that they are proposing massive changes. The more interesting question is how is bush going to react to it. If he adopts some of the recommendations (meaningless as they may be) the red meat supporters are gonna crucify him. If he stubbornly clings to his fucked up policies he'll look like a totally delusional fool. So I see it as a win win, though I haven't read it yet.

[gWbush is Mabus]

I haven't read it, but my thoughts are that...

the purpose/goal is to reset expectations very very very low.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

11. An irrelevant list of CYA proposals for a lost war.

Essentially it is full of proposals that are aimed at getting out of Iraq while saving face by denying reality.

The political impact will be to increase the demand for an end to the already irrelevant American part in what is being decided by others, the Iraqis, Saudis, Iranians, etc.

I'm still reading it, but with little interest.

The outcome of this incredibly inept attempt at "picking up the white man's burden" by attempting to install an American style "democracy", beholden to American masters, was foreseen by anyone who paid the slightest attention to the Middle East prior to the invasion.

It's "Peace with honor" all over again.

[QuestionAll...]

12. I think DU should post their own Iraq Study Group...

and name it the same and hopefully snag some googlers on it.
and ask the tough questions that weren't asked during this fakery #58763.

include questions about Gates' history (iran/contra, BCCI, etc.)
US military bases in Iraq
US mega embassy
etc.

[bullimiami]

13. i didnt have to get through the first paragraph to slip in lying propaganda.

""the Iraqi people have a democratically elected government that is broadly representative of Iraq’s population, yet the government is not adequately advancing national reconciliation, providing basic security, or delivering essential services.""


firstly the election was a sham. tightly controlled and overseen by the occupiers.
secondly, as an occupying power, it is OUR obligation by international law and treaty to provide the security and infrastructure not the occupied peoples.


contiuing to read.

[aquart]

16. Hope you're wearing hipboots.

[paulk]

26. I was struck by this also....

The Iraq government, while democratically elected, is NOT "broadly representative of Iraq's population" in that the Sunni's are not adequately represented.

Since this is one of the primary reasons for the government's failure to govern effectively, it's hard to see how the study group can have any credibility in whatever conclusions they draw.


----

also continuing to read....

[sandnsea]

48. So it's OUR obligation to provide security

and we're supposed to do that while withdrawing our troops - is that what you're saying?

[bullimiami]

49. yes. it has been OUR obligation to provide security once we toppled

saddams government and became the occupiers.

we have done a criminal job of it.

[bigtree]

14. It's one of those reports which will be interpreted differently according to motives

The WH is already claiming that its recommendations reflect their own thinking and efforts.

On the other side, our Democrats are using the criticisms in the report as validation that their opposition has been correct and that a change in course is needed.


I think it's a license for Bush to continue the occupation until he finds his "victory" or "success" in Iraq under the pretext that they're completing the recommendations of the report which is represented as a last chance to succeed.

What hasn't been answered is what impact the commission expects the recommendations will have on the conflict if taken piecemeal instead of approached comprehensively. Hamilton urged a comprehensive approach, but its not clear how any cherry-picking of the recommendations as a solution will be received. I don't think it's credible to take it apart, but I think it's inevitable.



Best Way Forward In Iraq
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_ron_full_061205_best_way_forward_in_.htm

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/bigtree

[jobycom]

27. My basic thoughts, too

I hadn't considered the "cherry picking" aspect, but you're right about it. Not only is there no accounting for that happening, but the very fact that it's not accounted for gives the Republicans to ability to blame the Dems for the plan's failure if the Dems alter it in any way. And if they don't alter it, Bush will keep doing basically what he is doing now, and will point out that the report give it little chance of success in the first place.

To me, it looks carefully worded to make Dems feel like we have won something, but to let BushCo continue doing what it wants to do, with maybe a slightly better strategy. As you say, both sides can read it differently, but since Bush controls the troops, only the way he interprets it really matters. Kind of like the IWR. A lot of Dems made the point in supporting it that their goal was to avoid war, and that they were trusting Bush with the "awesome responsibility" of using his new power wisely. Bush's response was "YEEHAWWW! I git to invade!!"

I think this is the same type of document. The only way to control Bush's response is to severely limit him.

[aquart]

15. It made the assumption that we're in control and the decisions are ours to make.

That's not reality-based.

[SalviaBlue]

17. I don't trust the motives of Baker

Due to his involvement in the 9-11 commission (cover-up) and the Iran-Contra cover-up, Hamilton is not trustworthy either. My opinion of ISG is that their mission is to steer us AWAY from the truth. I DON'T TRUST THEM. Since Day One (November 8th) the media has been pushing this report as a bipartisan answer to the Iraq problem. I don't think our Democtratic representatives should give this group's report much credance. Their motives are highly suspect.

[bluerum]

22. Just another pricey head fake? nt

[underpants]

18. I liked some of their early work

but later on they became quite pompous and self involved which segmented them and deteriorated they product. But Ringo made out pretty well.

[truebrit71]

29. yeah, but the Bass player had TERRIBLE taste in birds...

...and wound up losing his arse....

[radfringe]

19. off hand

if the recommendations do not agree with bush's smiley-face pictue of iraq they won't be implemented. bush only wants good news.

i haven't read the report yet, so no comment on the actual report from me

I will say the report will be played as being looked at and studied - candy for the masses to make it look like something is being done. Much like 'something' was done regarding the Dubai port deal, the recommendations of the 9-11 report etc.

I do believe baker and his gang were sent in to "rescue" the baby boy - whether or not the baby boy wants to be rescued is another matter. Cheney's control is slipping, but it hasn't slipped that much.

If Gates agrees with a particular course of action as recommended by the report, he still has to get baby boy's approval, and that means cheney's approval first.

just my two-cents - but once Gates has found his footing in the DOD, look for some fireworks behind the scenes between him and Cheney. On the other hand Gates could just drink the kool-aid and fall in behind Cheney, but my gut tells me he won't. My money is on fireworks and not kool-aid

[bluerum]

20. Just a way to provide cover for the squatter. This way, if the dems

start to demand the withdrawal of troops he can withdraw troops without appearing to cave in to the dems. He can make it appear as if like he is going along with the ISG.

Having spouted out that cynical analysis - I need to add that I have not read it.

[Jcrowley]

21. A combination

of equivocation with a touch of obfuscation mixed with a sophisticated sense of imperial hubris.

Gimme an S
Gimme a T
Gimme an A
Gimme an L
Gimme an L

What does that spell? More carnage. More War profiteering.

Go Iraq Study Groupies.

These people are so out of touch they think a lengthy position paper is going to resolve there war crimes? They want people to think they're actually doing something other than considering their investments in Halliburton and Boeing.

[Parche]

23. group

Farce
Farce
Farce
Farce
Farce


Just like the 9/11 commission, something to pacify the American population.

[jobycom]

24. A kinder, gentler, perhaps more sober Stay-The-Course strategy

It is still a plan for continued occupation. It is more sober than W's goal-less strategy, in that it sets incremental goals. It involves the Iraqi "government" about the same as W's strategy already does--meaning, it calls that government democratically elected and plans to use our military to support that government. It also keeps our troops close enough to control that government. Meaning, Iraq is still a colony.

The plan emphsizes more diplomacy from neighboring countries, but it sounds no different than Bush's previous PR strategy of sending Karen Hughes over there to make people like us. Baker's words are smoother, more diplomatic, but amount to the same thing--we won, now deal with it and let's move on.

It does not acknowledge that we were wrong to invade, it does not set up meaningful reparations for our crimes, it does not do anything different in intent towards bringing peace to Iraq. It sends more troops (just as the Repubs have wanted all along), with the promise that they will begin being downsized and redeployed in early 2008 "if things go well."

Same plan, smoother language, is what I see, though I admit that I haven't finished reading it, either.

It is a plan for occupation after a successful conquest, and is meant to better bind the US-installed government closer to us, to conquer over any other options. As I said, same plan, much smoother language. It will fail.

The couple of things it does that give me hope: It starts a debate from the assumption that the current plan is a failure. It opens up the possibility of diplomacy--which gives us more possibility of genuine progress once negotiations start, since negotiations take on a momentum of their own. And though its wording is crafted to appease moderate Dems, it also gives Dems an opportunity to take the words more literally than BushBaker wants, and make some real progress.

But it is still stay-the-course, and we need to do better. My knowledge of Viet Nam is not strong, but this seems like just about the same thing Nixon tried to do when he took office--end the war by sending more troops and crushing the opposition. Repub double-speak--Peace through war, end the war through increased fighting. Etc.

As I said, I haven't finished it, though.

Overall, it's a plan to get

[Jacobin]

25. It's a historical document

Its conclusions and recommendations are at least 2 years behind current events.

[Penndems]

30. Will, the paramount conclusion is that we've opened up a Pandora's Box in Iraq

and are knee-deep in a quagmire, which doesn't come as a surprise to many people in senior, experienced military and diplomatic positions (and in some not-so-senior positions). That's only news to those individuals who have been living in an alternative reality the past five years.

The recommendations set forth by the ISG will only be workable if Bush acts on them - and considering how seriously he took the proposals contained in the 9/11 Commission Report, I have a hunch the ISG Report will be collecting dust on a credenza in the Oval Office. :(

[paulk]

31. still haven't finished

but, at the very least, it's a major smackdown of the Bush administration's policies in Iraq.

[Avalux]

32. I have not read the whole thing, just excerpts. However -

my initial opinion (I doubt it will change) can be found here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2868116&mesg_id=2868116

[Lone_Star_Dem]

33. So far from what I've read

They've confirmed the Iraq military is in shambles, the police are not trained in policing but rather in fighting militants, and the police are corrupt and not trusted by the people.

The government isn't governing.

Their economy is in shambles, but they have oil so they have potential, to us if nothing else. However up to 500,000 barrels of said oil is being stolen daily and we're not getting the money.

Reconstruction funds were, and still are, being squandered on corrupt contractors.

International aid is nowhere near a level needed to bail our asses out.

The other nations in the region are all salivating over who gets to control Iraq.

Our recent support of Israel was a boon to Sadr and caused more distrust of the occupying American forces.

Iran and Syria are enjoying a shared belly laugh at the shit the US has stepped in. They're also letting us sink deeper into it as it serves them well.

The Saudis are cooling their heels and biding their time.

Turkey wants the US to take on the PKK for them and are getting pissed that we haven't.


Conclusion: We've put all our eggs in one basket and thrown it over an embankment. But they're really careful not to lay blame at anyones feet. It's amazing.

If things continue as they are now the civil war will escalate and the puppet government will be overthrown. The other powers in the region are waiting for the right time to make their moves and claim the scarred remains of Iraq. We cannot let this happen since Iran is the top runner to gain control of Iraq. Again, this isn't anyones fault, it's just an oops.

The potential for the Sunni-Shia conflict to spread across the region grows greater everyday.

Iraq is a breeding ground for religious uprising that has potential to devastate the ME. If this occurs the US could lose respect in the region.
My personal translation of that: This screw up isn't near it's peak and the US isn't done losing face in the ME and around the world, not by a long shot.


Solution: Sweep up as much dirt as we can and hide it under the rug. Create a more believable military and police. Remind the puppet government who put them there and that it's in their better interest to do as we say. Put out fresh flowers to cover the stench of death and decay before we attempt to sell our new and improved Iraq to the rest of the world.

Get someone who knows how to beg and make deals to gather up some international support for our new product.

Then stall until the Democrats are in power and dump it in their lap.

[blues90]

35. I have a problem with the entire thing

I have not read the entire thing yet either . Here is what troubles me most .

Here we have a group of people who for the most part have a destructive past , look at Baker and O'conner . Baker in just one small respect was the lawyer fighting against the people who need help from 9/11 and O'conner brought us Bush . In my own mind I can't get past the fact that these people have suddenly found a conscience or found some god and now have anyones best interests that they hold above their own . I don;t believe for on second people like this change .

With this said and there is of course more I can say , but with just this said alone there is no reason for me to hold one bit of trust in their motives . For me it appears this is nothing more than a view through the looking glass with a bit less light .

[butterfly77]

36. They are simple repeating what we have been...

saying here,for the past 2 to 3 years...and some of the points even longer. I always thought that when Bush stole the election that he would be impeached within a year or two after. I always thought this because,I thought that people had enough sense to see that he didn't have any foreign policy experience his anti-social behavior I thought could be seen clearly,and his imcompetence.


I have been frustrated,dismayed, shocked,dumbfounded,angry,horrified,and astounded at how long it has taken for the american people,(at least some) to come to the understanding that he had no business being a president. While watching the inaguaration march I was thinking they will see how completely and utterly ignorant,arrogant,and stupid this man-child really is... But, the pighead republicons were so into the power and hate they hold for most americans that they were to blind to see that he is was and is destroying this country slowly but surely with there help... They seem to not realize that they and their families have to live in this world the same as us and they have created hatred for the people of this country all over the world.

[LSK]

37. Im waiting for Keith Olberman to tell me whats in it

JUST KIDDING!!! :D

I downloaded the pdf but as Im at work, Ive had no time for it yet.

[sinkingfeeling]

38. Just finished reading it (and chuckling) online. My opinion: not much.

First, it's written all from the 'American' point of view: what we want, what we will do, what each thing does to America's reputation, etc. Where's any discussion of what's best for the average Iraqi? Secondly, most of the recommendations will not and cannot be implemented by the Bush Administration due to delusion, stubbornness, and a total lack of ability.

Several interesting items: Recommends Bush make it clear that the USA will not have permanent military bases in Iraq. Recommends that Bush state we're not trying to steal their oil. Says the total cost of Bush's Folly will exceed $2 trillion.

[dkofos]

39. Just finished reading the report and I am totally UNIMPRESSED.

If this is the best they can come up with, we will be there forever. (which was probably the plan all along)

Most of the recomendations should have been in place since 2003.

The CLUSTERFUCK that is Iraq was caused by INCOMPETANCE and GREED.

[VelmaD]

41. I find some of the terminology hilarious

particularly the "New Diplomatic Offensive". Diplomatic Offensive seems like an oxymoron to me.

[DoYouEverWonder]

42. Shouldn't it be called the PNAC Report?

n/t

[roamer65]

43. It will be irrelevant to Bush. He will just do what he wants anyway.

Bush is like a petulant, ignorant, spoiled brat kid that keeps grabbing for the candy at the checkout counter, despite being scolded. Nothing will change till he's out of office.

[callous taoboy]

44. Baker's lack of credibility is the wet blanket for me.

Baker- The man who likes to pop up when the shit hits the fan for the GOP, the man I've always suspected to be the grand dragon of all nefarious GOP deeds, the man who leveraged bush into the hell-hole he now finds himself. What he has to say now about Iraq is but a fart in the skillet for me.

[mtnester]

45. Look...over there!

no text needed.

[paulk]

46. well, about 2/3rd's of the way through

the report does a pretty good job of laying out how much of a clusterfuck Iraq is.

I don't think this report is without consequence for the Bush cabal. Bush ignores this at his peril, methinks. There are powerful factions within the Conservative movement that have finally come to see what a danger he is, not just to the Republican party (read: November's elections) but to their profit margins, especially if his incompetence causes the entire middle east to blow up in our faces. Which could easily happen.

It wouldn't surprise me to see Cheney forced into retirement. And it wouldn't surprise me, if Bush still proves uncontrollable, to see impeachment - with more than a few Republicans pushing the bandwagon.

That the ISG even happened means that it's not business as usual, IMO.

[jannyk]

47. Underwhelmed! n/t