Thoughts on Iraq Timeline
Despite his past outlook on related matters (he seems to have a hard time making up his mind), President Bush and his cronies have continuously refused to set a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq.
Some people seem to believe that a timetable implies a date written in stone on which all traces of U.S. Forces must be completely out of Iraq. That’s not the way I see it, and I don’t think it is even be reasonable to assume that they are talking about a complete “cut off date.” The people that want you to believe that have started spouting the term “cut-and-run.” I see a timetable as a goal, and it would be really nice to see some goals set in regard to this mess.
If you ask an Iraqi native, or even a U.S. soldier stationed in Iraq, there’s a reasonable chance that he or she will be in favor of a timeline and/or withdrawal. But, alas, I guess it’s not up to them.
I read an article in the L.A. Times that kind of left a negative (and misleading) vibe about the Democratic plan for Iraq. Get this… One complaint that was cited is that “it established no timetables, or targets, for reducing the U.S. military commitment there.” Firstly, that’s not exactly true. The Democratic proposal states:
Ensure 2006 is a year of significant transition to full Iraqi sovereignty, with the Iraqis assuming primary responsibility for securing and governing their country and with the responsible redeployment of U.S. forces.
Read: Work on transferring security management to the new “Iraqi government,” and start finding other things for many of our troops to do as quickly (this is 2006) and responsibly as possible. It may not be completely concrete, but it’s a lot more encouraging than what we’ve been hearing, and it’s certainly a target. The main issue is that the “right” was complaining when people were suggesting a timetable, and now they are giving flack with claims about an absence of a timetable. I do find it humorous that Bush seems to be giving up on his job two years before his term will be up. But it’s no laughing matter that the Democrats came up with a plan for Iraq, and the Senate GOP stole it, rebranding it as their own:
[Senator John W.] Warner [(Republican of VA and chairman of the Armed Services Committee]) said he decided to take the Democratic proposal and edit it to his satisfaction in an effort to find common ground between the parties on the issue.
The primary differences between the party approaches regards fixing dates for a withdrawal. The Democratic plan called for the administration to provide “estimated dates” for redeployment of American troops once a series of conditions was met, with the caveat that “unexpected contingencies may arise.”
But Republicans said that provision was cutting too close to setting a schedule for withdrawal. “We are not going to have any timetable,” Mr. Warner said.