Cowardly surrendercrat Condoleezza Rice and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki agree to timetable for withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq. The Bush administration isn’t even insisting on the weird “time horizon” formulation. Instead, Rice says that “We have agreed that some goals, some aspirational timetables for how that might unfold, are well worth having in such an agreement.”
This clearly smooths the course for actual moves to implementation of a timetable in 2009 if the next administration wants to implement one. “Stab in the back” arguments will be much harder to make. At the same time, it probably still provides enough wiggle-room for an administration that wants an open-ended presence to keep our troops there for years to come.
August 21st, 2008 at 11:11 am
It also provides wiggle room for a mavericky presidential candidate to show that he’s different from Bush– he thinks that Bush isn’t hard line enough on Iraq.
August 21st, 2008 at 11:12 am
I believe the correct epithets are “cheese-eating surrender monkey” or “weasel”. Did Rice make this announcement from Paris? I look forward to seeing how the Fox “News” tools and McCain’s campaign (really, why differentiate?) square this with their meme that withdrawal talks = surrender and defeatism. Should be good.
August 21st, 2008 at 11:19 am
I’m interested in this quote from the article: “There are clear articles (that) say that Iraq will not be used as a launching pad for any aggressive acts against neighboring countries and we already did clarify this.”
What counts as a “launching pad” in this case? Presumably it means no massing of American ground forces for a land invasion of Iran, but a ground war in Iran was never likely–war with Iran will primarily be an air war. Does this mean no sorties across the Iran-Iraq border for an air campaign? If not, what about logistical support? Can command and control for an Iran mission be housed in Iraq? And will any such agreement have teeth if the US actually starts a war with Iran? The troop withdrawal is apparently going to be out of major cities, but I assume we’re still keeping our huge embassy and our rurual bases?
August 21st, 2008 at 11:23 am
Oh, sweet, innocent Matthew. How wonderful it must be to live in a world where crazy right-wing attacks and narratives-of-outrage need to be based in truth, facts, or anything resembling historical evidence. It’s the democrats’ fault. It always was the democrats’ fault. It will always be the democrats’ fault. The greatest national power the earth has ever known cannot be defeated by inferior outsiders–it has to be taken down from sinister forces within itself. And 9/11 was caused by Bill Clinton not doing something in 1993. I read it somewhere.
August 21st, 2008 at 11:53 am
Yeah, I can easily imagine that a Democrat-implemented implementation of a Republican-designed withdrawal plan will be the Dems’ fault…because something will have changed, and we should have un-agreed to the plan, or something.
August 21st, 2008 at 11:54 am
“Democrat-implemented implementation…” — look, I’m distracted by hitting refresh looking for VP news, OK?
August 21st, 2008 at 12:05 pm
This is good news I hope. George Bush seems to have caught on to John McCain’s formulation of how to “win” in Iraq. You simply declare victory and pull out. Not to be confused with the Democratic strategy which ignores the rhetorical flourish.
In any case, a pullout is a pullout. Would an aspirational time horizon by any other name smell as sweet? Here’s hoping the Bush administration can pull Petreaus back from proselytizing long enough to execute this plan without the incompetence that has marred just about every other American initiative in Iraq.
August 21st, 2008 at 12:19 pm
Unnoticed by Matt:
– this is after the surge quelled the violence, and created the space required for political work
– Had the left had its way, and the troops been withdrawn without the counter-insurgency plan, we’d now have a mess on our hands
Timetables after victory are quite different than timetables in the midst of battle. I recognize that this is yet another concept that Matt has difficulty wrapping his head around.
Maybe he can think of trains and make himself happy
August 21st, 2008 at 12:26 pm
If the fine print bears out this story, then this is a great day.
Obama must pounce: McCain is a dangerous extremist who has been absurdly out of touch with the mainstream of Americans, and even with the Bush administration.
August 21st, 2008 at 12:41 pm
C’mon, aspirational timetables are the things they should paint on the side of vans along with wizards, unicorns, and rainbow elves. Fiction.
http://thesebastards.blogspot.com/
August 21st, 2008 at 1:14 pm
OK Obama – Here’s where you point out that McSame really IS different from Bush. Bush finally agreed to timetables, but McSame said he would NEVER have them (because he wants to stay there forever). A target rich environment lately for you!
August 21st, 2008 at 1:19 pm
So will McBush still be warmonger on Iraq or is he going to claim it was all his idea from the beginning?
August 21st, 2008 at 9:17 pm
This is rather unique. I’ve never seen a presidential candidate have such influence on foreign policy. Ever. Obama’s timetables made Maliki’s demand viable, and Maliki’s demand made Bush fold. Wow. Delivering on a campaign promise before you are president is impressive!
March 1st, 2009 at 9:47 pm
cialis
Great site. Good info
March 14th, 2009 at 7:52 am
It is the coolest site,keep so!
xanax
March 22nd, 2009 at 7:05 am
tramadol
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
March 22nd, 2009 at 11:07 am
buy viagra online
It is the coolest site,keep so!
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:40 am
It is the coolest site,keep so!
buy cheap viagra