Bush Says Change Needed in Iraq...Does He Mean It?

Without getting into the recommendations of the ISG (Iraq Study Group), Bush seems to be saying change is needed in Iraq...or is he? Looking through the press briefings of Tony Snow, and coupling those with some of George Bush's own comments in the past week, it seems as if he has dug in his heels, and is intent on Staying The Course, convinced that history will prove him right, and perhaps wise. Even today, it was amazing to hear him say, "I do know that we have not succeeded as fast as we wanted to succeed..." as if in some fashion he perceives the Civil War unfolding in Iraq as being successful in some mysterious way that the rest of us just cannot grasp.

It's very likely that America's death toll will reach 3,000 by Christmas, or very soon thereafter, and those wounded in action now exceed 20,000. According to the ISG Report, eventual costs of the war (equipment replacement, bringing troops back to a readiness status, and long term care costs of those wounded) will exceed $2 trillion dollars. The Pentagon will be breaking it's contractual promises to those in the National Guard in having adequate troops for the next rotation into Iraq, and some Generals are openly admitting that our troops are strained, some to a point of breaking...where in this can President Bush find any semblance of success? What is he looking at that could justify Staying The Course?

He made it abundantly clear today that there will be no troop reductions in the near foreseeable future, and gave this writer the impression that he still sees Victory a viable reality. Even his pronouncement that he would let America know before Christmas what if any changes in strategy he feels are necessary is disturbing. The ISG Report says change needs to be immediate, that time is running out...if time is running out, how does President Bush justify taking two more weeks just to review the report, and consult with the Pentagon? Can he not hold a full cabinet meeting tomorrow? What about the recent briefings he had from his Generals...surely he has a pretty good idea of what directions it is that he will lay out for the troops, and for us as a nation? He says change is needed, but does he mean it? It sadly seems very doubtful.



http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2708557
Bush Says New Approach Needed in Iraq
Bush Gives Chilly Response to Some Recommendations of
Iraq Study Group
By TERENCE HUNT AP White House Correspondent

WASHINGTON Dec 8, 2006 (AP)— President Bush, admitting that "it's bad in Iraq," acknowledged Thursday that the United States needs a new approach in the unpopular war and promised to unveil details in an upcoming speech.

Bush said he was disappointed in the progress in Iraq, but continued to oppose direct U.S. talks with Iran or Syria and remained steadfastly committed to spreading democracy across the Middle East.

"I do know that we have not succeeded as fast as we wanted to succeed," Bush said, standing alongside British Prime Minister Tony Blair, his chief ally in the war. "I do understand that process is not as rapid as I had hoped."