Which way will he go?
By Creature
Double down. Double dutch. Double Whopper with cheese. I have no idea which "new way forward" leak to believe, but Bush may yet grab the life-line extended to him by the ISG. Today's WaPo is reporting that cooler heads have prevailed seeing as how the Joint Chiefs are advising the president that the neo-cons, led by the leading-con, John McCain, are kinda crazy after all.
The article also states that the "military planning is well underway for a major change," "that any new strategy be sensitive to regional context" [this means no 80% solution and possibly no Mahdi army crackdown], and finally that "the chiefs planned to tell Bush of the significantly increased risk to readiness in the event of a new emergency, rather than push for a timeline to leave Iraq."
Leaving the timeline and troop withdrawal issues aside, and, yes, that's a big aside, it's hard not to see the practicality in all these suggestions especially when faced with the double-down leaks that have been thrust into the media by the neo-cons as exemplified on Sunday's Meet the Press [transcript here, the roundtable read is scary but worthy]. Now it all comes down to the president. Is he the "last neo-con in offfice," as Farid Zacharia suggested on Tuesday's Daily Show, or is he ready to stand down and leave the policy to the less belligerent folks in the room?
Read more.
(Cross-posted at State of the Day.)
Double down. Double dutch. Double Whopper with cheese. I have no idea which "new way forward" leak to believe, but Bush may yet grab the life-line extended to him by the ISG. Today's WaPo is reporting that cooler heads have prevailed seeing as how the Joint Chiefs are advising the president that the neo-cons, led by the leading-con, John McCain, are kinda crazy after all.
The nation's top uniformed leaders are recommending that the United States change its main military mission in Iraq from combating insurgents to supporting Iraqi troops and hunting terrorists, said sources familiar with the White House's ongoing Iraq policy review. [...]
The chiefs do not favor adding significant numbers of troops to Iraq, said sources familiar with their thinking, but see strengthening the Iraqi army as pivotal to achieving some degree of stability. They also are pressing for a much greater U.S. effort on economic reconstruction and political reconciliation.
The article also states that the "military planning is well underway for a major change," "that any new strategy be sensitive to regional context" [this means no 80% solution and possibly no Mahdi army crackdown], and finally that "the chiefs planned to tell Bush of the significantly increased risk to readiness in the event of a new emergency, rather than push for a timeline to leave Iraq."
Leaving the timeline and troop withdrawal issues aside, and, yes, that's a big aside, it's hard not to see the practicality in all these suggestions especially when faced with the double-down leaks that have been thrust into the media by the neo-cons as exemplified on Sunday's Meet the Press [transcript here, the roundtable read is scary but worthy]. Now it all comes down to the president. Is he the "last neo-con in offfice," as Farid Zacharia suggested on Tuesday's Daily Show, or is he ready to stand down and leave the policy to the less belligerent folks in the room?
Read more.
(Cross-posted at State of the Day.)
1 Comments:
The new "way forward" looks more like spinning around in circles. Perhaps the idea is that this flurry of activity will fool the public into thinking something's actually being done or considered, when in reality, Bush is just looking for someone to agree with him.
By Anonymous, at 10:30 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home