Iraq Study Group Report Out Today

Bump and Update: The report is out. WaPo coverage is here. The Wall St. Journal has the Executive Summary. (pdf) Excerpts are here.

Bush and Robert Gates say it's not the last word, just one of many ideas the Administration will consider.

Original Post:

With the precision of a swiss timepiece, the Iraq Study Group Report will be released today.

From the U.S. Institute for Peace:

A PDF version of the ISG report will be available for download after 11:00 AM EST on the websites of the U.S. Institute of Peace (www.usip.org), the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy at Rice University (www.bakerinstitute.org), the Center for Strategic and International Studies (www.csis.org), and the Center for the Study of the Presidency (www.thepresidency.org).

CNN reports:.

  • Bush to meet group urging changes in Iraq hours before report is released
  • President has lunch Tuesday with group co-chairman James Baker
  • White House downplays report, citing other groups analyzing Iraq
  • Group expected to urge talks with neighbors, gradual pullout with no timetable
< Bloggers Need Christmas Heart Too | Steps Forward >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    ok (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by soccerdad on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 04:29:44 AM EST
    so now we can move on to the next meaningless distraction

    Hardly (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by scarshapedstar on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 08:36:48 AM EST
    We're now embarking upon the most important 6 months in Iraqi history. Really. We mean it this time.

    Pinky swear...


    Why it's all moot (4.50 / 2) (#10)
    by Dadler on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:54:05 AM EST
    Christopher Dickey has a disturbingly insightful new piece about the Baker recommendations and why they won't work and will almost certainly lead to more gruesom failure.

    The methods of Saddam are waiting to be used again, by the Shiites this time, and we are going to end up supporting it.  Won't that be a miserable irony as Hussein hangs from the gallows.

    We will be paying for the childish, ignorant, violent incompetence of Bush and his disadministration for years, decades, who knows how long to come.

    It's all in (4.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Che's Lounge on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 09:27:17 AM EST
     the cards (or reports). We will not redeploy. We will increase the troop levels. Wow, who could have seen that coming?

    Pull the funding. Money talks and BS walks.

    yeah but who is going to pull it? (none / 0) (#4)
    by soccerdad on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 09:44:16 AM EST
    The Dems said they won't

    It all a big dance, neither party want out of Iraq. they will continue to bury us in BS until

    1. There are no more Iraqis/troops left alive
    2. no equipment left for them to use
    3. the final soldier climbs into a copter atop the embassy
    4. we nuke Iran.

    I'm betting on 4.

    My prediction (1.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Wile ECoyote on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 10:47:42 AM EST
    1.  Talks with Iran:
    2.  We will recognize them as the ME power if:
    3. They let us off the hook in Iraq.  While-
    4.  -We let them have nukes.  Quietly of course.
    5. Israel is blasted off the face of the earth, and we do nothing about it.

    Right Memes (none / 0) (#6)
    by jondee on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 10:59:32 AM EST
    Wile - I believe the operative buzz phrase is "driven into the sea". If Iran wre perfectly   willing to risk almost complete annihilation by   attacking a nation in possession of hundreds of   nukes, dont you think they would already gone right to the source and launched a direct attack  against "the great Satan" by now?

    I think you are wrong. (1.00 / 1) (#7)
    by Wile ECoyote on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:30:34 AM EST
    A couple nukes will take out Israel.  Look at the size of Israel.  It would take dozens to take out Iran.  Iran will strike first.  No matter what, we will not trade New York for Tehran.  

    You assume (none / 0) (#8)
    by Edger on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:46:55 AM EST
    wrongly, I think, that they are suicidal. Within a few minutes of a launch toward Israel being detected Tehran and most of Iran would become a radioactive desert.

    The Iranian leaders may be crazy, but I think they'd like to be around for awhile.


    There has STILL not been presented... (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by Bill Arnett on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 12:09:50 PM EST
    ...one iota, a single scintilla, or even a whiff of PROOF that Iran is even pursuing nuclear weapons, and if all we have to go by is the bush/cheney propaganda machine insofar as proof is concerned; we will NEVER have any proof other than what the maladministration releases.

    I can't believe that so many intelligent people don't look at all this war-mongering rhetoric for exactly what it is: more BS being formulated, distributed, and made-up, imaginary intelligence that is of equal quality to the intel we had from bush/cheney regarding Iraq: zero, zip, zilch, nada, none, nothing, less than nothing, and more made-up imaginary threats from the cabal.

    We have the biggest liars in all of history running the government and people STILL believe their nonsense regarding Iran?


    I think... (none / 0) (#12)
    by Edger on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 12:13:50 PM EST
    ...that the majority of trolls who appear to believe the nonsense and propaganda re Iran do not believe it.

    But they want you and I and everyone else to believe it. I think it's a responsibility avoidance thing after supporting bush for so long.


    Just (none / 0) (#16)
    by Wile ECoyote on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 02:11:14 PM EST
    what is your definition of a troll?  Someone that does not agree with you?

    Wiley ru one of these crazy world-enders? (none / 0) (#20)
    by bx58 on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 03:07:07 PM EST
    Isn't it so much easier to make religious "nuts" on the other side seem crazier than your own religious nuts? People who think Israel is the last battlefield are winning.

    The money being made is not bad either,you think that's right?


    Nope (none / 0) (#26)
    by Wile ECoyote on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 05:26:07 AM EST
    What religion am I by the way?  I do not think Israel is the last battlefield.  My guess Europe will be the last battlefield.  

    Hey (none / 0) (#17)
    by Wile ECoyote on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 02:11:53 PM EST
    I am just giving my prediction.  Let's hear yours.  

    I think they will probably retaliate... (none / 0) (#18)
    by Edger on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 02:40:14 PM EST
    So you (none / 0) (#27)
    by Wile ECoyote on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 05:27:09 AM EST
    must agree with steps one through five then.

    I have't read the report yet (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by Edger on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 05:57:02 AM EST
    So I don't know what steps 1 - 5 are, but if they involve attacking Iran then no I don't agree.

    I don't need an ISG report though to know that either the US or Israel will probably attack Iran. That's been obvious for a long long time. Probably Israel will pull the trigger to make it look like it wasn't the US that did. And to give you guys a chance to deny that the US did. But you'll know better.

    So will the rest of the world. It'll be transparent beyond belief, just like the consquences will be beyond belief. You might want to start practicing saying things like "Holy sh*t, what the f**k have we done?" so it'll be easier to say when you're left with your mouth hanging open in shame and disbelief at the dearh toll.

    You don't think Bush/Cheney invaded Iraq to spread freedom and democracy and peace and love and grooviness and flowers do you?

    The invasion of Iraq is part of the war with Iran that has been happening for some time.

    What we see in Iraq is exactly what was intended by Bush/Cheney all along.

    Morning Wile. Wile? Wake up, Wile? ;-}


    Steps (none / 0) (#29)
    by Wile ECoyote on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 10:06:18 AM EST
    1-5 were my predictions.  You did not disagree with any of them.

    You're right, I didn't (none / 0) (#30)
    by Edger on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 10:17:31 AM EST
    Your predictions were:
    1) A couple nukes will take out Israel.  
    1. Look at the size of Israel.  
    2. It would take dozens to take out Iran.
    3. Iran will strike first.
    4. No matter what, we will not trade New York for Tehran.
    And they may very well happen.

    If Iran is attacked, there is a good chance I think of your predictions happening.

    Because Iran will retaliate. That seems to be what you want.

    Forcing them into it will make you feel better?


    With the exception (none / 0) (#31)
    by Edger on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 10:24:11 AM EST
    of step 4. Iran will retaliate, not strike first. They are not as stupid as Bush is, or as you'd like to have people believe.

    Impressions from the executive summary (none / 0) (#9)
    by Al on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:47:49 AM EST
    The ISG report does call for the removal of all combat brigades not necessary for force protection by the first quarter of 2008. The immediate increase in troops seems to be designed to protect the forces as they withdraw. I think it would also give the appearance of a strengthened force in Iraq, so that the process doesn't look like a hasty retreat. If this is the case, I think Bush may go along with it, despite the initial appearances. As the ISG says quite clearly, there is no time to dither. Bush can't wait this out and hope that it will become the next president's problem. If something is not done quickly, the region will collapse within the next year, on Bush's watch.  

    It is also interesting that the ISG explicitly links everything that is happening in the Middle East to the Arab-Israeli conflict, and demands direct talks involving Israel, Lebanon, Palestinians (those who accept Israel's right to exist) and Syria, and reminds Bush of his prior commitment to a two-state solution of the conflict. Is this less urgent than withdrawing from Iraq? Perhaps not.

    Every thing I've heard this morning... (none / 0) (#13)
    by Bill Arnett on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 12:29:06 PM EST
    ...are just different ways of saying the SOS (same old sh*t) and means we can look forward to another 3-4 thousand dead soldiers, 30-40 thousand more wounded, the final destruction of any credibility America ever had, the further destruction of our tissue-thin paper tiger military forces, and widespread death and destruction throughout the Middle East.

    It was nothing more than another dog and pony show, designed to placate the masses while the neocons continue the most ruinous foreign policy in WORLD, not just AMERICAN history.

    We have returned to the Dark Ages and if the neocons get their way we won't even be able to say jack about it without facing imprisonment and torture until our "sanity" has been restored - or taken away.

    Likudnik/Crazy Christian coalition finished? (none / 0) (#14)
    by bx58 on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 12:48:20 PM EST
    I thought so. These people have some serious leverage.

    Do they have pictures of Bush snorting coke off a hookers belly? I don't get it.

    Hey Al (none / 0) (#15)
    by Che's Lounge on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 12:48:50 PM EST
    I only read the Exec summary also. I'm curious as to how much of my tax money went to paying these parrots. They have no plan (still). And any recommendations as to "internal" changes will fall on incompetent ears.

    The very first paragraph reveals it all. We must maintain our presence there to protect American interests, aka the Queen of Oil (so much to discover!). Later they have the nerve to insist that Iran respect Iraq's sovereignty. That would be funny if mortar rounds weren't actually falling onto the beds of Iraqi children, complements of the neocons and the maroons that enabled them.

    They state that if the current Iraqi government cannot maintain control, we should withdraw support.

    Wha? Did they just telegraph a strategy for the resistance? I guess maybe the internet email toobs were all clogged up with porn. And speaking of porn, this whole exercise in stalling is far worse. We need more porn and less war.

    Thanks for nothing. Death still rains in Iraq. And we did it.

    This Neocon Agenda (none / 0) (#21)
    by bx58 on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 03:15:39 PM EST
    What is the neo-con agenda? Is it money or is it religion? Or both?

    IMO it's money, so they're all full of crap, the Promised land Jews and the Bible thumpers.

    Money and power... (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Edger on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 03:29:21 PM EST
    ...destruction to acquire it.

    Money and Power (none / 0) (#22)
    by squeaky on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 03:25:28 PM EST
    Interestingly enough the biggest supporters of Israel today are the Christianists. The poor jews that are following along are going to have to convert when He comes or, face eternal damnation.

    Seems to me that the religious zealots are being used by the political powers that be.


    Feingold Right on (none / 0) (#24)
    by squeaky on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 08:20:17 PM EST

    Unfortunately, the Iraq Study Group report does too little to change the flawed mind-set that led to the misguided war in Iraq. Maybe there are still people in Washington who need a study group to tell them that the policy in Iraq isn't working, but the American people are way ahead of this report.


     and Keith Olbermann with Russ Feingold

    yep, this report was (none / 0) (#25)
    by cpinva on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:12:13 PM EST
    a real eye opener..............not. i understand it makes a great door stopper though.

    Wile (none / 0) (#32)
    by Che's Lounge on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 12:07:44 PM EST

    A couple nukes will take out Israel.  Look at the size of Israel.  It would take dozens to take out Iran.  Iran will strike first.  No matter what, we will not trade New York for Tehran.

    Iran doesn't have nukes. Iran does not have the ability to make nukes. Israel does.


    Your predictions are ridiculously irrelevant.

    "Iran will strike".. (none / 0) (#33)
    by jondee on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 12:58:49 PM EST
    The thinking seems to be that Iran is perfectly   willing to sacrifice a few hundred thousand, render the land and many "holy sites" (including  Jerusalem) uninhabitable, all in order to "drive  Israel into the sea" (as they say). This mantra  has been repeated by the right noise (and regime  change) machine a hundred times a day for the    last six years. Also, diplomacy and negotiation  are apparently useless with "these people" who   are too consumed with their fanatical, irrational hatred of us to think logically or ethically about anything. War: it gives our lives meaning.