|
Bush declares progress in Iraq war
|
View this Thread in Original format
| LatinLover |
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Bush hailed a new "degree of durability" in security gains in Iraq Thursday, saying it should permit him to announce further U.S. troop reductions later this year.
With the war in its sixth year and violence substantially decreased in recent weeks, Bush gave a brief and hastily arranged update on the war that focused on several fronts of progress.
He said that violence is at its lowest ebb since the spring of 2004, that forces are in their third consecutive month with lower violence levels holding steady, and that Iraqi forces are becoming increasingly capable of both fighting and securing the country.
"The progress is still reversible," Bush acknowledged. But he added, "There now appears to be a degree of durability in gains."
Looking ahead to the next recommendation on troop levels from U.S. generals in Iraq, Bush suggested its reasonable to expect "further reductions in our combat forces, as conditions permit."
Bush's four minutes of remarks showed him eager to talk progress. But he attached qualifications at every step, wary of repeating the mistake of his so-called "Mission Accomplished" speech over five years ago, in May 2003.
"We remain a nation at war," he said. "The terrorists remain dangerous and they are determined to strike our country and our allies again."
His appearance was timed to Friday's start of reduced tour lengths for U.S. troops. Starting Aug. 1, Army units heading to Iraq will serve 12-month tours rather than the 15 months that soldiers are currently deployed. That's a milestone that Bush wanted to spotlight even though it won't apply to troops now serving.
Bush said this reduction "will relieve the burden on our forces and it will make life easier for our wonderful military families."
The statement also coincided with a growing acceptance that the mission in Iraq is starting to shift, from mainly combat to mainly training Iraqi forces, securing the Iraqi border with Iran, rebuilding the economy and battling foreign terrorists.
Still, the conflict remains a key issue in the presidential campaign. Republican nominee in waiting Sen. John McCain has repeatedly accused presumed Democratic standardbearer Barack Obama of planning a reckless withdrawal. Obama has countered that the United States never should have gone to war there in the first place.
Increasing numbers of people in this country believe the U.S. troop increase in Iraq has helped improve the situation there. According to a USA Today-Gallup Poll conducted last weekend, 48 percent say the buildup has made things better. That's up from 40 percent who said so in February and 22 percent in July 2007.
On the other hand, 56 percent say the U.S. erred in invading Iraq in the first place. That figure is down slightly from the spring, but has changed little over the past two years.
About 145,000 troops remain on the ground in Iraq, now that all the combat brigades sent last year as part of the so-called surge have returned home as of this month. But that's still higher than the roughly 130,000-135,000 who were there before the troop increase.
Offering a concrete example of the gains made, Bush noted that Iraqi forces are taking the lead in a new offensive this week in the Diyala province northeast of the capital of Baghdad, considered one of the last major al-Qaida strongholds in the region.
About 50,000 U.S.-backed Iraqi military and police forces have launched a major operation against al-Qaida insurgents there.
"This operation is Iraqi-led; our forces are playing a supporting role," Bush said. "In the months ahead, the Iraqis will continue taking the lead in more military operations across the country."
Bush somewhat improbably claimed progress on negotiations for a long-term agreement with Iraq governing the U.S. troop presence there, including everything from rules of engagement to drivers' licenses for the military. The White House's original goal was to have it completed by Thursday — the end of July. The United Nations mandate that now allows the U.S. to be in Iraq expires Dec. 31.
But the difficult talks have spawned many disputes, including over setting timelines for troop withdrawals, and the best hope now seems to be only a stopgap agreement by the end of the year. With only a few months left of the Bush administration, the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has taken a toughened stance on its own demands.
SOURCE |
|
|
| Clovis |
Good for you George, maybe you will have that lasting legacy of accomplishment. :gsmile:
| quote: | July 30, 2008
Women and Children Last
Reader A.G. writes:
Enjoyed your Comment. But I’m sorry to see you, of all people, buying into the “surge” crap. In the French and British papers at least—which are much more likely to be objective on this, just as they were on WMD five years ago—the consensus is that the reduction in violence is (a) minimal, (b) mostly the product of exhaustion and successful ethnic cleansing, and (c) largely irrelevant, since the country as it might have been is gone, the middle and professional classes having fled and a once thriving (if oppressed) city reduced to a set of frightened sectarian enclaves. It’s as if the captain of the Titanic, having run the ship into an iceberg, then starts boasting about the success of the lifeboat surge. The success of the lifeboat surge in putting half the passengers into little boats in the freezing North Atlantic doesn’t change the reality that the ship is at the bottom of the ocean, half the passengers and all the crew are drowned, and Cunard is still planning to sail the next ship directly at the neighboring iceberg.
He’s referring to the bit where I say that McCain has “a right to be irritated” by “Obama’s reluctance to admit that the surge in Iraq which he opposed has helped make the withdrawal from Iraq which he supports less problematic.” He has a point, and not just about the murkiness of the surge’s purported success.
The commentariat, in this instance possibly including me, has been letting McCain get away with a set of fake moral equations: Obama’s opposition to the surge cancels out Obama’s opposition to the war; McCain’s support of the surge cancels out McCain’s support of the war; the “success” of the surge equals the “success” of the war; tactics = strategy. Therefore the score in the campaign game is all tied up, 1 to 1. Or maybe McCain is even surging into the lead, since he is “right” about today’s news while Obama is only right about yesterday’s.
Another point. The attack on Obama’s vote against the surge ignores—forgive me—context.
At the time the Senate voted, the proposal for the surge tactic was firmly embedded in a strategy. That strategy, to the extent that it wasn’t just a cynical political calculation (stave off total failure till after the election), was an imperial dream that’s as impracticable as it is repugnant: keep the war going as long as it takes to create an Iraqi client state that will agree to permanent American military bases and a permanent occupation. To endorse the tactic was to endorse the strategy. But this doesn’t mean that in a different strategic context a President Obama wouldn’t be flexible about troop deployments—for example, in the context of a careful plan to extract us from an unnecessary war that has weakened us militarily, economically, and diplomatically and has done less than nothing to make another 9/11 less likely.
Bonus link: check out Bernard Avishai’s smart take on Obama’s Berlin speech.
-Hendrik Hertzberg |
|
|
|
| Krypton |
| Who cares? 4-5 million refugees, 100,000's dead. No political reconciliation. The entire venture is a failure and a war crime. |
|
|
| hardcore trancer |
| Since when do we actually believe or care what Bush is saying? aside from Latinlover ofcourse. |
|
|
| _Ocean_Drive_ |
| quote: | Originally posted by hardcore trancer
Since when do we actually believe or care what Bush is saying? aside from Latinlover ofcourse. |
Since they voted him back in at the last election. |
|
|
| Kinezi |
| Havent Bush been declaring progress in Iraq ever since he went to war in Iraq? |
|
|
| Lebezniatnikov |
| quote: | Originally posted by Kinezi
Havent Bush been declaring progress in Iraq ever since he went to war in Iraq? |
It's amazing how much progress he's made since declaring the mission accomplished five years ago. |
|
|
| Kinezi |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov
It's amazing how much progress he's made since declaring the mission accomplished five years ago. |
I find these 'progress' declarations totally pointless, he went to war with Iraq with clear set objectives, to smoke out evil Saddam Hussein and to destroy his deadly arsenal of Weapons of Mass Destruction. He had clearly acheived both these objectives, their is no more WMDs in Iraq and Saddam was hanged after free fare trial conducted by Iraqies (instead of biased Hague Tribulnal).. Mission objectives in Iraq was been accomplished in swift succession. I dont know what is more progress that is to be made there. As far as US is concerned their job is done. |
|
|
| hardcore trancer |
| quote: | Originally posted by Kinezi
I find these 'progress' declarations totally pointless, he went to war with Iraq with clear set objectives, to smoke out evil Saddam Hussein and to destroy his deadly arsenal of Weapons of Mass Destruction. He had clearly acheived both these objectives, their is no more WMDs in Iraq and Saddam was hanged after free fare trial conducted by Iraqies (instead of biased Hague Tribulnal).. Mission objectives in Iraq was been accomplished in swift succession. I dont know what is more progress that is to be made there. As far as US is concerned their job is done. |
looks like soon they ll have to come up with a new excuse to stay there,Iam putting my money on Iran. |
|
|
| LazFX |
| quote: | Originally posted by hardcore trancer
looks like soon they ll have to come up with a new excuse to stay there,Iam putting my money on Iran. |
I am 50/50 with you on that.... but I have a gut feeling you may win that bet. |
|
|
| St_Andrew |
| quote: | Originally posted by Kinezi
dont know what is more progress that is to be made there. As far as US is concerned their job is done. |
They certainly made sure to piss off a lot of potential Al Quaida members too, spurring them up, helping them recruit members etc. But I guess that doesn't matter that much as long as all the evil WMDs are gone!
But yeah, I think Bush should take it easy on the "progress" or "accomplished" speeches, the ones he made previously have kinda backfired :p |
|
|
| Krypton |
| Al-Qaida and neoconservatives have symbiotic relationship. Both need enemies to justify their presence. |
|
|
|
|
