… When it’s a time “horizon”, of course!
As accepted yesterday, regarding the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, by no less a personage than (drum roll, please) President George W. Bush.
Bush is still, notably, not advocating a timetable, or even a time “horizon”, for a complete US troop withdrawal. But still, as Satyam at ‘Think Progress’ so helpfully recalled here, over the years Bush has been notably resistant to the idea of anything approaching a timetable for the US troop withdrawal.
But as I have been arguing consistently since June 2005, announcing a firm timetable for a total troop withdrawal will be a factor that greatly helps the negotiations needed to assure that US commanders can ensure that this withdrawal is orderly, that is, one during which the troops are not being shot at and harassed as they leave.
… I find it fascinating that Bush has been forced to move so fast, so far, toward actually accepting that a substantial– or even, as I still push for, total– withdrawal of troops from Iraq is the best way forward. (As far back as June 8, I concluded that his attempt to force a longterm “Status of Force Agreement” onto the Iraqis already seemed “clearly destined for failure.”)
At the political level inside this country, however, Bush having moved toward accepting the necessity for a substantial drawdown in Iraq, and moreover, for a time “horizon” for this drawdown– as long advocated by Barack Obama– could help Obama rebuff John McCain’s accusations that his troop-drawdown proposal is defeatist and destabilizing.
So it might well help Obama politically.
Interesting.
3 thoughts on “When is a timetable not a timetable?”
Comments are closed.
“the President and the Prime Minister agreed that improving conditions should allow for the agreements now under negotiation to include a general time horizon for meeting aspirational goals — such as the resumption of Iraqi security control in their cities and provinces and the further reduction of U.S. combat forces from Iraq. The President and Prime Minister agreed that the goals would be based on continued improving conditions on the ground and not an arbitrary date for withdrawal.”
Yes that sounds very Obama doesn’t it? Start pulling out at the start of 2009 regardless , no qualifications such as “conditions on the ground” and a very, very, very arbitrary date for withdrawal – ie in 16 monhts.
What is going to be interesting about this, is whether Obama, as C in C, will respect the agreement between the Iraqi government and the US, or insist on imposing his own regardless of the advice of his commanders on the ground?
And of course we are all well aware of Obama’s extensive expertise in government and public affairs.
That’s going to be something the American voters will be weighing up in November?
over the years Bush has been notably resistant to the idea of anything approaching a timetable for the US troop withdrawal.
If war that cost 2 Billions of dollars /week its really unrealistic calling for withdrawal empty handed isn’t Helena?
What about 106 US military bases in Iraq the major part of 2.0 Billions spending/week over the years in Iraq goes to built, so who will be in America’s Ziggurats in Iraq?
I doubt they handed over to Iraqis after that?
even though is its Iraq in needs to 106 Military bases, we all know the goal of US of regime change to make Iraqi more friendly and less threat to its neighbours, so under old regime Iraq have not more that10-20 military bases and other small camps for training, its far to be compared with US style military bases where its designed to be as US small city on Iraqi land.
President Bush and Prime Minister Maliki spoke yesterday in their regularly scheduled secure video conference, about a range of matters including the improving security situation and the performance of Iraqi Security Forces across Iraq, from Basra, to Maysan, Baghdad and Sadr City, and Mosul. The two leaders welcomed the recent visit of Prime Minister Erdogan to Baghdad and the successful visit of Prime Minister Maliki to the UAE.
In the area of security cooperation, the President and the Prime Minister agreed that improving conditions should allow for the agreements now under negotiation to include a general time horizon for meeting aspirational goals — such as the resumption of Iraqi security control in their cities and provinces and the further reduction of U.S. combat forces from Iraq. The President and Prime Minister agreed that the goals would be based on continued improving conditions on the ground and not an arbitrary date for withdrawal.
Statement by the Press Secretary on Iraq
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/07/20080718.html