The latest in a long line of ‘new’ plans

U.S. and Iraqi officials rolled out the latest in a series of “plans” for the future of the war, but looking over the details, there are some new words, but old substance.

Top U.S. officials in Iraq today predicted that Iraqi security forces could be largely self-sufficient within 12 to 18 months and said the Iraqi government is building a timetable for disarming militias, quieting insurgents and solving ongoing struggles for economic and political power.

Khalilzad said Iraqi leaders have committed to a timeline for forging a national compact among warring factions and have promised to come to agreement on establishing universal political rights, sharing the country’s oil wealth, bridging sectarian divides and disarming militias who rampage through neighborhoods unchecked.

“In the course of the next 12 months, assuming Iraqi leaders deliver on the commitments they have made . . . there should be a national compact in place by that time, with a constitutional amendment, with a program for dealing with militias,” Khalilzad said.

See? All we have to do is be more patient, wait for a few more Friedmans, and then we’ll see real progress. Today, officials even used words Americans want to hear, such as “timeline” and “timetable.”

Of course, as Judd noted, the rhetoric “is not accompanied by any change in strategy.” If Iraqis fall short of the timeline, there are no consequences — other than perhaps getting a new timeline. “Casey made it clear that if the latest effort to get the Iraqis to assume more responsibility doesn’t work out, he’s ready to reinvent the wheel again. This is the same approach the Bush administration has been pursuing for more than three years. Staying the course provides very little incentive for Iraqis to assume control of their own security problems.”

For that matter, you might be thinking that this isn’t the first time we’ve heard about yet another new approach to the war, which doesn’t sound terribly dissimilar to the old approach to the war. As the DSCC noted, there’s a good reason for that.

White House Has Unveiled New “New Iraq” Plans At Least Nine Times Already

10/22/06: “The Bush administration is drafting a timetable for the Iraqi government to address sectarian divisions and assume a larger role in securing the country, senior American officials said.” [New York Times, 10/22/06]

7/25/06: “President Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki announced plans to enhance security forces in Baghdad in an effort to stem the growing violence in the Iraqi capital…The new security plan also calls for coalition forces to provide greater firepower and protection equipment to the Iraqi forces.” [U.S. Department of State, 7/25/06]

6/25/06: “There was also word from the Pentagon on a new plan to cut the number of U.S. troops in Iraq…U.S. military officials confirm that the plan could cut the total number of U.S. troops in Iraq by more than half, perhaps as low as 50,000 troops by the end of next year.” [“NBC Nightly News,” 6/25/06]

6/13/06: Bush and his Cabinet met about the new Iraq Unity government’s plan and “assessed ongoing U.S. efforts in each area of the Iraqi plan and directed adjustments to U.S. plans as necessary to fully align with the plans of the new government.” [White House Fact Sheet, 6/13/06]

11/30/05: Under a “Plan for Victory” banner, Bush “spelled out what he called his strategy for victory in Iraq.” [AP, 11/30/05]

5/24/04: In a speech in Pennsylvania, Bush “laid out a five-point plan to ‘achieve freedom and peace in Iraq.'” [AP, 5/25/04]

11/17/03: Bush said, “In November of 2003, we negotiated a new plan with the Governing Council, with steps for an accelerated transition to Iraqi self-government.” [AP, 11/17/03; White House Remarks, 12/12/05]

9/9/03: “Bush began a delicate drive today to build national and global support for his expensive new plan for controlling Iraq…A day after using a prime-time television address to reveal his $ 87 billion budget for the war on terrorism next year, Bush and his aides said the stakes in Iraq are so grave that they should dwarf any diplomatic disagreements or skepticism about the costs.” [Washington Post, 9/9/03]

7/23/03: Bush “said that his chief administrator in Iraq, Paul Bremer, has a new plan to accelerate the progress of Iraqi reconstruction.’ The plan sets out ambitious timetables and clear benchmarks to measure progress and practical methods for achieving results,’ said Bush.” [White House Remarks, 7/23/03; Christian Science Monitor, 7/24/03]

DSCC Chair Chuck Schumer said, “[T]wo weeks before an election, a vague new plan? I don’t think the American people are going to take it very seriously.”

I have a hunch he’s right.

1. ALL WE CAN DO IS LEAVE.

2. THE BEST THING WE CAN DO IS LEAVE SOON.

If violence is going up the more we train Iraqi troops, then Iraqi toops must be involved in the violence.

3. SEE ABOVE

  • Seems to me I’ve heard the Bushistas talk about plans before. Like after Katrina they were going to solve poverty. We’re going to Mars. We were going to leave no child behind.

    It’s all just sound-bite-sized lies to try and stop the dam burst on November 7th. The only real plan they have is a half-assed plan to save what’s left of their own asses.

  • Bush’s statements about Iraq seem to have nothing to do with reality (surprise!) and everything to do with politics. He just shufles the pieces of his fantasy around like a jigsaw puzzle of Guernica.

  • “In the course of the next 12 months, assuming Iraqi leaders deliver on the commitments they have made . . . there should be a national compact in place by that time, with a constitutional amendment, with a program for dealing with militias,” Khalilzad said.

    That’s not a timetable or timeline, that’s a PREDICTION. One based on an ASSUMPTION as well.

    Not surprising coming from the gang who confuses a GOAL with a STRATEGY.

  • And why do we need to draft a “consequences-less” timetable for Maliki? Can’t a secretary do that?

  • “Khalilzad said Iraqi leaders have committed to a timeline for forging a national compact among warring factions and have promised to come to agreement on establishing universal political rights, sharing the country’s oil wealth, bridging sectarian divides and disarming militias who rampage through neighborhoods unchecked”

    Along with cure cancer, solve global warming, end world hunger, stop reality television, get the Cubs into the World Series, and prove the existence of God.

  • “a program for dealing with militias”

    Good luck with THAT one. So far they haven’t figured out how to stop the government forces from being infiltrated or even completely filled with sectarians who then use the weapons we buy for them to kill their age-old enemies.

    What’s the old saying… Oh yeah…

    HOPE IS NOT A PLAN.

  • First, the timing is interesting in a smelly-fish sort of way. This “self-sufficiency” would be just in time for real 2008 impact, so I think that the adminstration really wants to hand it all over to the Iraqi’s at that time even if it is goatf**ked. Consequences are beside the point and frankly not all that relevant or that important in terms of politics in the US – at least to Karl Rove’s way of thinking.

    This leads me to the second point, which is what is the definition of “largely self-sufficient?” Does anyone with a modicum of sanity and intelligence think that the Iraqi’s will be able to handle things? Seriously. We are having trouble dealing with things now.

    Lastly, it occurrs to me that they seems to have gotten with the whole timeline program, so all you GOP trolls can stop bitching about that to Democrats. But I still don’t see much of a strategy so GOP trolls can stop bitching about that too.

  • And why do we need to draft a “consequences-less” timetable for Maliki? Can’t a secretary do that?
    Comment by Ohioan

    Really! They could probably photocopy one in the Nixon library.

  • The president is running out of Friedman’s in which to do anything other than waste lives and money. Two to three more Friedman’s will put us right in the heat of the next presidential election. A winning strategy looks to be a problem for those guys to figure out. It’s been the Bush-the-trustfunder solution to all his problems: piss away the time until it’s someone else’s job to bail him out.

  • Is this the Secret Plan (TM)?

    I’m not impressed.

    Actually, I haven’t read it. I know I’ll not be impressed 😉

  • … a timetable for disarming militias, quieting insurgents and solving ongoing struggles for economic and political power.

    OK Lance smarty pants, I’ll tell you the secret plan to make this happen –

    Step one: Put on fancy flight suit whilst singing “I feel pretty.”
    Step two: Aim nuclear missles at Iraq.
    Step three: Push big shiny button to launch missles.
    Step four: Shrug because you forgot to withdraw the troops before Step three.
    Step five: Wait for the ground to stop glowing and go get the oil.

    See? No more people, no more fighting, no more economy and…and stuff. So there.

  • Wait. It’s still October. This could be the “October Surprise.”

    We will defeat the insurgents in Iraq—*drumroll, please*—by PLANNING THEM TO DEATH!!!

    …evil laughter ensues….

  • TAIO,

    Who you think you are calling a “smarty pants”?

    Now that I’ve read the “plan”, I find I was right. It does not impress. It’s not a plan, its just a wish. Like the blind merry man Blinkin from “Robin Hood, Men in Tights” who’s pulled guard duty, they “think” they are doing something, while in fact they are groping in the dark (must get that from Mark Foley).

    Things aren’t going to get better in twelve or eighteen months, because for the last three years we’ve been busy training death squads instead of police and sectarian militias instead of a national army. And nothing is going to undo that now.

    So to quote the usual ghost haunting a house: “GET OUT!”

  • Comments are closed.