Bush Administration Laying Groundwork for Significant Troop Pullout From Iraq
by Pamela LeaveyThe pressure has been on for the Bush administration to begin drawing down the troops from Iraq. From John Kerry’s speech at Georgetown late last month, to the fracas the ensued from Murtha’s plan in the House, to Biden’s OP/ED in today’s WaPO, it’s becoming increasing difficult for the Bush administration to ignore the calls.
The L.A. Times reports that “President Bush will give a major speech Wednesday at the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Md., in which aides say he is expected to herald the improved readiness of Iraqi troops, which he has identified as the key condition for pulling out U.S. forces.”
The administration’s pivot on the issue comes as the White House is seeking to relieve enormous pressure by war opponents. The camp includes liberals, moderates and old-line conservatives who are uneasy with the costly and uncertain nation-building effort.
It also follows agreement this week among Iraqi politicians that the U.S. troop presence ought to decrease. Meeting in Cairo, representatives of the three major ethnic and religious groups called for a U.S. withdrawal and recognized Iraqis’ “legitimate right of resistance” to foreign occupation. In private conversations, Iraqi officials discussed a possible two-year withdrawal period, analysts said.The developments seemed to lay the groundwork for potentially large withdrawals in 2006 and 2007, consistent with scenarios outlined by Pentagon planners. The approach also tracks the thinking of some centrist Democrats, such as Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware, the senior representative of his party on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Some analysts say the emerging consensus might have less to do with conditions in Iraq than the deployment’s long-term strain on the U.S. military.
The Bush administration has been over-taxing the troops, of that there is no doubt.
The shift in the administration’s attitude also may reflect concern that the U.S. military can’t bear the current strains indefinitely. Some analysts believe the potential long-term damage to the armed forces, not political pressure, could be the decisive factor for Bush and his advisors.
A former Pentagon official, Andrew Krepinevich, “argues that these strains have become a key factor informing administration thinking.”
Unlike the Vietnam era, when the military had a nearly endless supply of draftees, the Iraq experience has sharply reduced the flow of recruits into the volunteer armed forces and attrition rates are alarmingly high, Krepinevich noted.
Other factors, such as federal restrictions on the frequency of National Guard deployments, also limit available personnel.
This summer, differences between the White House and some military commanders over troop reductions were the result of these problems, analysts believe. Although divisions remain within the administration, there are increasing signs that Bush may be calculating that a faster drawdown carries fewer long-term risks.
“I think the administration will yield to the reality of an Army that is apparently beginning to buckle under the strain of these long-term deployments,” Krepinevich said.
The L.A. Times also reports that some Hawkish “analysts see the same progress that Rice spoke of, yet are worried that the White House may move too fast.” How much sway will these Hawks have over the Bush administration with increasing pressure from the public to change the course? Among those bidding to stay the course are Gary J. Schmitt, director of advanced strategic studies at the American Enterprise Institute.
Meanwhile, the Boston Globe reports that the “US presses allies to delay Iraq pullouts.” And an OP/ED in yesterday’s Boston Globe takes at look at “From Vietnam to Iraq: How to stop the war.” Steven Bergman, the OP/ED author offers”
Stopping a war is difficult, especially given the hubris, spin, and tragic incompetence of the Bush-Cheney administration. Yet even Kissinger and Nixon were able to manage it, however clumsily and with a great cost of lives on both sides. We Americans can stop it in time to save many thousands of wounded and dead. Now.
Filed under: Congress, Democrats, House Of Reps, In The News, Iraq, John Kerry, Senate | Get Permalink or trackback |
People applaud an unassailable convert like Murtha. I think our Centrists are trying to push these neo-cons. Does Steve Bergman want a pied piper or someone inside the Congress to try to work the policy. There are layers to the solution.
BTW, will anyone mention other us that JK spoke on Oct. 26th?
Marjorie G
It does appear the centrists are busy pushing the neo-cons. What amazes me is Murtha suddenly gets all these kudos for speaking up and the far leftists hail him as some sort of ultra liberal for speaking up.
By the way we had a visit from Ed Schultz’s audio guy – http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=1233
Marjorie G Says:
November 26th, 2005 at 5:19 pm
BTW, will anyone mention other us that JK spoke on Oct. 26th?
I want to know too. I am sick of the attacks on JK supposedly undercutting Murtha. It’s cause he said the magical words “Out now” that makes him a hero to the silly left.
Indie Liberal
Funny thing is, Murtha did not even say “out now” he just said out sooner.
Did he say the word “immediate?”
“hail him as some sort of ultra liberal for speaking up”
Yep. They sure are pretty clueless. About many things it seems. I really don’t think they should be considered part of the “reality based community”
Seen comments from some of them saying they want Murtha to run for President in 2008. LOL!!! Think it would burst their little bubbles a tad once they found out how strongly socially conservative he is and how “pro-war” in many cases? Many of our little lefty droolers sure aren’t the sharpest tacks in the drawer, that’s for sure…
Marjorie G
He may have but his plan boils down to out in 6 months to 1 year. So that’s what all of a few months shorter than JK’s plan.
Dave from Princeton
I don’t think they have done their homework – Murtha is a pro-life darling. Hailed by the conservative Christians for voting in their interests.
Murtha also said practicable, which leaves a lot of reality and wiggle room.
Marjorie G
So far what Rumsfeld has advocated has been more along the lines of JK’s plan. Honestly JK being who he is, I’m sure he’s glad something is being done, which is more the point of why he spoke out.
Yeah that’s a problem– people falling in love with anyone who says “out now.” I really like and respect Murtha, so I don’t want to take anything away from him, but obviously the people who swoon because he said something remotely close to “out now,” really call to attention a serious problem: what will they do when the war is over? Or if this is true about bush starting withdrawls soon… what will be these people’s argument for a Democratic congress in 2006? There are other things to focus on, too. Other faults of this administration, other things not to be satisfied with in our country. Of course the war is important and should remain important in 2006. But we’ve got to remember not to lose sight of or ground on these other issues while we act like getting out of Iraq is THE issue, the litmus test, everything.
The insistence over litmus tests is to bolster their anti-war choice for next time, in those strict confines because they don’t want Biden or Hillary, but also to say they were always right.
All this angst over vanity.
True.
But I dont want Hillary either.
No one is suggesting that Murtha is an ulta-liberal because he stood up and spoke. What is being suggested is that because is is NOT a liberal, the fact that he made such an impassioned appeal has the chance to re-focus the debate. And that is exactly what it is doing.
As to the effect of Bush starting withdrawals now, much will depend on what happens in Iraq as a result. If there isn’t enough security on the ground, the policy is likely to backfire.
Vice President Cheney, 11/21/05:
A precipitous withdrawal from Iraq would be a victory for the terrorists, an invitation to further violence against free nations, and a terrible blow to the future security of the United States of America.
LA Times, 11/26/05:
President Bush will give a major speech Wednesday at the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Md., in which aides say he is expected to herald the improved readiness of Iraqi troops, which he has identified as the key condition for pulling out U.S. forces…The developments seemed to lay the groundwork for potentially large withdrawals in 2006 and 2007…
If John Kerry or John Murtha suggest it, its a lousy idea, yet if the very same suggestion is made a week later from the Right, it smells like roses. 2006 is a chance to vote some adults into office that stop using our troops as politcal foder.
Well, I guess this shoots down yet another myth/mantra that closes nearly every press conference: “This administration does not base it’s policy on the fluctuation of poll results”…yea right, and Santa is on the South Beach diet…
Judith
I don’t know if you ever visit any of the other liberal blogs and forums, but yes, some are touting him as an ultra liberal and some are suggesting that he run for president. These are the very same leftists who decry the DLC, and complain that Kerry and others aren’t liberal enough.
They are ignoring the fact that Kerry spoke up first and came forward with a plan, that is actually similar to what Rumsfeld and BushCo seem to be now touting. And yes, withdrawals won’t work if there is not enough security on the ground.
Kerry has said this for months (over a year now actually) — build a strong coalition and start withdrawals. Phased withdrawals.
Sgt. York says
“If John Kerry or John Murtha suggest it, its a lousy idea, yet if the very same suggestion is made a week later from the Right, it smells like roses. 2006 is a chance to vote some adults into office that stop using our troops as politcal foder.”
I think you just read my mind man. Bush is coming to Annapolis? My homestate’s capital? Awwwww man. First this normally oh-so-blue-state elects Bush lackey Bobby Haircut governor, now Bush has gotta come here to spread his lies. Oh well, at least it’s just a day. Maybe this will drive Gov. Ehrlich’s approval numbers lower.