Iraq Withdrawal News Goes Unnoticed
By Philip V. Brennan
Keeping in mind Robert Burns' advice that the best-laid schemes "O mice an 'men Gang aft agley [often go astray], An'lea'e us nought but grief an' pain, For promis'd joy!" there is a glimmer of great good news about Iraq that might just portend a lasting solution to what has been an ongoing debacle.
Good news, that is, for President Bush and the Republican Party but bad, bad news for that huge segment of the Democratic Party that in their pursuit to recapture the White House and maintain control of Congress lust after a crushing defeat for their country in the war in Iraq.
A blockbuster story in Tuesday's New York Sun revealed a startling development in the administration's planning that would result in an end to our occupation in Iraqi and a substantial withdrawal of most U.S. forces by the summer of 2008, thereby depriving the Democrats of the issue they hope will propel them to an overwhelming victory in the 2008 elections.
According to the Sun, which shines brightly through the dark clouds emanating from The New York Times building, Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute, the Iraq war tsar has "quietly announced that the American and Iraqi governments will start talks early next year to bring about an end to the allied occupation by the close of Mr. Bush's presidency."
To put it simply, what is in the works is an end to our occupation of Iraq, withdrawal of all but 50,000 U.S. troops in non-combat roles, all taking place next July, long before the November elections.
The Times, of course, could not find space to report this incredible breakthrough although it has to rate as the most important development in the long and dreary saga of the Iraq war.
more...
posted by VerityINK at 5:19 AM
Information:
5 Comments:
Well, hey, they're going to just HATE the w/d they've been saying they want so badly!
I can't wait to see THIS backtrack!
Politically speaking, this is good for us Republicans BUT am I the only one who worries about the equally important message that it sends to the bad guys?
I think we should maintain a large contingent of battle-ready troops in the Iraqi theater. North of Baghdad and in the south near the Gulf. We kept 150,000 men in Germany forever, and as long as we are forbidden to expand drilling in the Gulf of Mexico we have to keep 35,000 troops in that area to protect the flow.
Morgan
I hope this decision isn't politically motivated. If it's not, then it is probably just the next step in the Iraq campaign. I can't see the President allowing military decisions to be influenced by politics. He hasn't been willing to do this throughout his entire Presidency. Why would he start now?
Aren't we announcing our plans to the enemy? What is to keep them from lying low until the withdraw date? Who is the traitor that announced these plans anyway?
God question anon.
Morgan
Post a Comment
<< Home