Exiting Iraq

The flap over the evidently clumsy and inappropriate intervention by Gen Sir Richard Dannatt last weekend has missed the bigger point, underlined by today's reports about the James Baker commission.

The US is going to be extricating itself from Iraq soon anyway so the general (and his presumably even more demoralised men) will get their wish.

Consider three factors:

1 The Baker report will give Bush the cover he needs to declare "mission accomplished" and reverse course.

2 The Democrats, who it now looks certain will control at least half the Congress from January, will apply increasing pressure for a significant US drawdown.

3 None of the likeliest Republican candidates for 08 - McCain, Giuliani, Romney - will be suicidal enough to stick with a "stay the course" strategy. Indeed , watch for McCain especially to start walking back from his calls for more troops and blaming the incompetence and arrogance of the Pentagon's political leaders for creating a catastrophe that even McCain himself, and several more US divisions, will not be able to save.   

Comments

[James W Bremner]

Maybe someone can explain to me how handing Iraq to Iran on a sliver platter, which is what a coalition withdrawal anytime in the next couple of years means, is helpful to Iraq, the Iraqi people, the US, the Middle East or anyone else, except the nutcases in Iran.
Baker's idea of talking to Syria and Iran and somehow involving them in a "solution" in Iraq, is the most nonsensible thing I have ever heard.

[Michael Wiley]

I found your conclusions surprising in light of the interview I watched yesterday (Monday, 16 October 2006) with Messrs. Baker and Hamilton.

Both men ascertain that no conclusive decisions as to recommendations have been made by the Iraq Study Group, and that the individual members are still at variance with one another. I agree with their views that the matter is very complex, and so thoughtful consideration is still underway.

Given where we in the States are at with midterm elections, and the urge to politicize anything that favors one party or the other, Messrs. Baker and Hamilton asserted that no findings will be forthcoming until after the elections are over. This, of course, means after the elections on 07 November 2006.

Your article fails to point out that as of yet, the Democrats avowed front-runner, Ms. Hillary Clinton, still backs the battle in Iraq although she expresses reservations about the manner in which it is being waged.

[Tucker]

As an American, "I HOPE SO"!!!

The majority of us, here in the states, "NEVER""EVER"!!! Wanted to see that invasion of Iraq. Not one American, that I know, ever wanted our guys over there fighting. I only hope Bush has finally got the message.

What we did want to see, was Bin Ladin captured, or killed. "BUT", "NO"!! War monger, vengance seeking Bush had to go after Sadam. We, like the rest of the world, were lied to concerning "weapons of mass destruction". Bush knew all along that there weren't any weapons.

So many American, Britsh, and other allied soldiers & civilian workers have died in this wasteful war.

I "praise the British people", as I, like other American's, feel the Brits, by demanding Blair to step down, and removing one of Bush's stooges, has help to hasten any moves to get us out of Iraq. For this we American's are grateful.

Also, the up & coming November elections, here at home, the majority of American's will be doing their part. Just you British wait & see what we have to say, come November. "Be not surprised", if the Democrates get an over whelming vote to take over.

It's high time that we take back America, and work on repairing the damaged image our wonderful nation has been subject to, these nearly past eight years.

[Marcia Halvorsen]

I know blogs are largely ramblings, often vitriolic, usually incoherent. Still, they usually have some central idea. What is the idea here? All I can think is you are practicing your linking skills, and that is fair enough. One practice outing should be enough, however, so I hope your next blog makes a point.

[Frankschnittger]

"The Democrats, who it now looks certain will control at least half the Congress from January, will apply increasing pressure for a significant US drawdown."

I hope you are right, but the opinion poll data you link to seems to indicate that both the House and Senate votes are too close to call as to who will emerge in control. Either way, a narrow majority won't be that much of a "sea-change" in the political landscape given that Party whips do not apply. Could it be that the economy, combined with a bit of old fashioned jingoism trumps Iraq and Afganistan and even Foley in voter's minds?

[Jim Walton]

It's been clear for a while now, that the White House has been casting about for a straregy to declare victory and come home.

I just wonder how long we can put up with a failed state in Iraq.

[emanuel appel]

dear Mr. Baker,

If America leaves, Iran will emerge as the dominant country in the area. There will be an Iran/Iraq alliance. The war will be postposed, not avoided.

If I were king, Saddam would hang tomorrow, Iraq and Kurdistan would be divided, Iran's nuclear facilities destroyed, and we would leave the day after.

[Stephen Morgan]

“Between Iraq and a Hard Place”
The future of Iraq is now beyond US control. Changes in tactics are futile. The is Army impotent. The big end picture is already being drawn by historical forces beyond America's power of influence. The US is increasingly more of an observer, than an actor. Indeed, developments in Iraq now have more influence over US domestic affairs than the US does over Iraqi.
Developments are moving so quickly, that the luxury of months of debate is not viable. Denial is not an option. If the US establishment hopes to salvage some integrity, the crisis demands immediate, decisive and honourable action. Zero option : admit wrong, withdraw.

Stephen Morgan. Brussels

[Stephen Morgan]

“Between Iraq and a Hard Place”
The dicussion and confusion over "options" is just the public face of denial. Even the doves can't face the truth that events in Iraq are now beyond US control and its future is being shaped by historical forces outside America's circle of influence. The Army is impotent, while the politicians pontificate.
The US is no longer an actor, but simply an observer. Indeed, Iraq now has more influence over US domestic affairs, than the US does over Iraqi events.
Developments are now unfolding so quickly, that the US hasn’t the luxury of months to debate. Zero option : admit wrong/ withdraw.