The Baker commission looks like a joke from this preview

[Thorgrim]

President George Bush has told senior advisers that the US and its allies must make "a last big push" to win the war in Iraq and that instead of beginning a troop withdrawal next year, he may increase US forces by up to 20,000 soldiers, according to sources familiar with the administration's internal deliberations.
Mr Bush's refusal to give ground, coming in the teeth of growing calls in the US and Britain for a radical rethink or a swift exit, is having a decisive impact on the policy review being conducted by the Iraq Study Group chaired by Bush family loyalist James Baker, the sources said.

Although the panel's work is not complete, its recommendations are expected to be built around a four-point "victory strategy" developed by Pentagon officials advising the group. The strategy, along with other related proposals, is being circulated in draft form and has been discussed in separate closed sessions with Mr Baker and the vice-president Dick Cheney, an Iraq war hawk.
Point one of the strategy calls for an increase rather than a decrease in overall US force levels inside Iraq, possibly by as many as 20,000 soldiers. This figure is far fewer than that called for by the Republican presidential hopeful, John McCain. But by raising troop levels, Mr Bush will draw a line in the sand and defy Democratic pressure for a swift drawdown.

The reinforcements will be used to secure Baghdad, scene of the worst sectarian and insurgent violence, and enable redeployments of US, coalition and Iraqi forces elsewhere in the country.

Point two of the plan stresses the importance of regional cooperation to the successful rehabilitation of Iraq. This could involve the convening of an international conference of neighbouring countries or more direct diplomatic, financial and economic involvement of US allies such as Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.

"The extent to which that [regional cooperation] will include talking to Iran and Syria is still up for debate," said Patrick Cronin, of the International Institute for Strategic Studies. "Externally, US policy is focused on what is achievable. Some quarters believe Syria in some ways could be helpful. There are more doubts about Iran but Iran holds more cards. Some think it's worth a try."

Yesterday, a top state department official, David Satterfield, said America was prepared in principle to discuss with Iran its activities in Iraq.

Point three focuses on reviving the national reconciliation process between Shia, Sunni and other ethnic and religious parties. According to the sources, creating a credible political framework will be portrayed as crucial in persuading Iraqis and neighbouring countries alike that Iraq can become a fully functional state.

To the certain dismay of US neo-cons, initial post-invasion ideas about imposing fully-fledged western democratic standards will be set aside. And the report is expected to warn that de facto tripartite partition within a loose federal system, as advocated by Democratic senator Joe Biden and others would lead not to peaceful power-sharing but a large-scale humanitarian crisis.

Lastly, the sources said the study group recommendations will include a call for increased resources to be allocated by Congress to support additional troop deployments and fund the training and equipment of expanded Iraqi army and police forces. It will also stress the need to counter corruption, improve local government and curtail the power of religious courts.

"You've got to remember, whatever the Democrats say, it's Bush still calling the shots. He believes it's a matter of political will. That's what [Henry] Kissinger told him. And he's going to stick with it," a former senior administration official said. "He [Bush] is in a state of denial about Iraq. Nobody else is any more. But he is. But he knows he's got less than a year, maybe six months, to make it work. If it fails, I expect the withdrawal process to begin next fall."

The "last push" strategy is also intended to give Mr Bush and the Republicans "political time and space" to recover from their election drubbing and prepare for the 2008 presidential campaign, the official said. "The Iraq Study Group buys time for the president to have one last go. If the Democrats are smart, they'll play along, and I think they will. But forget about bipartisanship. It's all about who's going to be in best shape to win the White House.

The official added: "Bush has said 'no' to withdrawal, so what else do you have? The Baker report will be a set of ideas, more realistic than in the past, that can be used as political tools. What they're going to say is: lower the goals, forget about the democracy crap, put more resources in, do it."

Addressing Congress yesterday, General John Abizaid, the top US commander in the Middle East, warned against setting a timetable for the withdrawal of troops from Iraq, saying it would impede commanders in managing US and Iraqi forces. Gen Abizaid spoke as the Senate armed services committee began re-examining US policy after last week's Democratic election victory. But Gen Abizaid argued against extra troops, saying US divisional commanders believed more pressure needed to be put on the Iraqi army to do its part.

Four-point strategy

· Increase US troop levels by up to 20,000 to secure Baghdad and allow redeployments elsewhere in Iraq

· Focus on regional cooperation with international conference and/or direct diplomatic involvement of countries such as Kuwait and Saudi Arabia

· Revive reconciliation process between Sunni, Shia and others

· Increased resources from Congress to fund training and equipment of Iraqi security forces

US plans last big push in Iraq | The Guardian | Guardian Unlimited

-Yeah, 20k troops are gonna secure Baghdad, just like last time!
-oo, talk to Saudi Arabia and Kuwait...like we aren't already doing that on a daily basis
-"reconcile sunni/shia" oh yeah GREAT plan, why didn't we think of that before...stop the civil war! oh its so obvious!
-More training of Iraqi Security forces...I guess almost 4 years now isn't enough, few a few more months and bam the corrupt Iraqi police and Interior Ministry forces are going to turn from militiamen and deathsquads into soldiers of the new beacon of freedom in the middle east

I really hope this is some serious mis-reporting, because it might as well just read "STAY THE COURSE" and while it will lead to the downfall of any GOP chances for 2008, the downside is that it will cost hundreds of more american lives before we pullout anyway

[thatguyoverthere]

It's a mess.

The only way we can win over there is to secure Baghdad, but even if we do, we still have to secure the rest of the country, which is a task that gets harder every day. It's not possible with the current level of troops, and the critics are probably right in that Iraq will dissolve into even more chaos if we leave. The Sunni and Shia are increasing their animosity every hour.

You're right in that the 20,000 is a joke, even for Baghdad alone. Really, the only way it can be won is if we add 100,000+ more troops. We need a soldier standing every ten feet if we're serious about winning over there. Adding 20,000 is just speeding up the rate that they're being thrown into the meat grinder over there IMHO.

I know 100,000 troops could never be added without a draft, and a draft would certainly bury the Republican party for decades, but if we leave, we lose, and staying the course is not currently leading us down the path of success.

The options are dangerously limited for Bush and company.

[DosEquis]

I was at the bar last night with my buddy who is a navy recruiter (die hard republican). This other guy was there was a master sgt. in the marines and has been to somalia, gulf war one, and got back from Iraq last year. I asked how he felt about rumsfeld leaving, he said it was a good thing and that it will be nice for some new perspectives. I asked what he thinks it would take to "win". He told me that we need a significant jump in the number of soldiers and we need to hang it out another 3-5 years unless we felt like fighting small battles here there for the next 20 years. He compared handing over iraq to a democracy comparable to handing over the school to the 4th graders and telling them run their show.

I told him there were goin to be small battles no matter what, no matter how long we stay. He essentially agreed and said it was a pretty f-ed up situation. I then pressed why adding more troops is the answer then. I dont remember what he said to that because i had a good buzz and my head hurts today.

[Thorgrim]

The commander of our forces in Iraq said just this week that we simply don't have the soldiers to commit more to Iraq