Don’t Do This
The trial balloons have been coming fast and furious and are now reaching epic proportions. As Powerline explains:
How's that for multilateralism? The report's conclusions apparently are being cleared in advance by Middle Eastern intelligence officials.
The proposals reportedly include an approach to Iran and Syria — a policy that Robert Gates, a member of the commission, has argued for.***
Rarely has a government report been more eagerly awaited than the one being prepared by former secretary of state James Baker and former congressman Lee Hamilton, an Indiana Democrat, about how the U.S. can leave Iraq.
I would have said the question is how the U.S. can win in Iraq.
The commission’s discussions are said to be focused on an option presented by a panel of experts that the United States concede that the situation in Iraq cannot be stabilized and make plans for a phased withdrawal of U.S. troops.
Iraq "cannot be stabilized"? That strikes me as a ridiculous statement. One can legitimately ask whether Iraq can be stabilized at acceptable political, military or financial cost. But that would require some hard analysis of what the stakes are and what those costs may be. Notwithstanding the results of Tuesday's election, I think the American people are adult enough for such a discussion.
All I can say is that if this is done, this may be the first administration in history to reach a negative number on its approval rating. Do not do this. Do not.
Other Links to this Post
-
Stop The ACLU — Sunday, 12 November , 2006 @ 4:38 pm
By jpe, Sunday, 12 November , 2006 @ 4:46 pm
The Powerline guys are ridiculous. They criticize the panel based on a summary that comes via leaks. That’s fine if one is criticizing broad contours, but with smaller details (the difference between “Iraq can’t be stabilized” and “Iraq can’t be stabilized at an acceptable cost”), it’s just absurd. I really can’t believe they have ever been taken seriously.
By mokus, Sunday, 12 November , 2006 @ 5:53 pm
It could easily turn out the Baker Plan will come to be regarded as the moderate approach to disengagement in Iraq. Dems are pressing to fast track a cut and run strategy. Either way, it’s a win for Islamofascism, and big setback for freedom and self-determination in the Muslim world.
By these colors run, Sunday, 12 November , 2006 @ 6:32 pm
does the moniker say it all?
are we prepared now for the genocide that shall follow in Iraq as we ‘disengage?
we have become a nation of hedonists. selfserving, immoral, and graceless. and we will deserve the miserable end which we speed toward.
By mokus, Sunday, 12 November , 2006 @ 7:06 pm
Au contrare.
Some of us don’t include ourselves in your “we.” Conservatives aren’t part of the week-kneed surrender chorus, and object to being included in any association of cowards and appeasers.
Nor are we willing to go off half cocked, or to assume the sky is falling. Not all the cards are face up yet. Take heart and hold your mud.
By Bill Franklin, Monday, 13 November , 2006 @ 6:50 pm
> are we prepared now for the genocide that shall follow
> in Iraq as we ‘disengage?
I don’t remember genocide being part of Operation Cakewalk..was that considered before the invasion? Do have to admit the administration has gotten America in over its head - just as Bush Sr. predicted. Seriously, how can you support putting our troops in the middle of a sectarian conflict? Do you want our troops to shoot the Sunnis killing the Shiites, or the Shiites killing the Sunnis? Please explain how you stay the course in a civil war.
Meanwhile America has to elect Democrats to restore basic civil liberties like Habeas Corpus. I think running colors should worry more about Americans and our security and less about Iraqis and hatred for each other (and America).
> it’s a win for Islamofascism
And pulling out of Vietnam was a win for Communism, right? Please.