Page 2 of 3   <       >

Iraq Study Group Report

Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.

"The United States must not make an open ended commitment to keep large numbers of American troops deployed in Iraq." (p.xvi)

"Many military units are under significant strain . . . many units do not have fully functional equipment for training when they redeploy to the United States." (p.7)

"The United States has appropriated a total of about $34 billion to support the reconstruction of Iraq . . . International support for Iraq reconstruction has been tepid. . . " (p.25-27)

"U.S. economic assistance should be increased to a level of $5 bilion per year rather than being permitted to decline." (page 87)

"Iraq is a major test of, and strain on, U.S. military, diplomatic, and financial capacities. Perceived failure there could diminish America's credibility and influence in a region that is the center of the Islamic world and vital to the world's energy supply." (p.35)

"The primary mission of U.S. forces in Iraq should evolve to one of supporting the Iraqi army." (page 70)

"While it is clear that the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq is moderating the violence, there is little evidence that the longterm deployment of U.S. troops by itself has led or will lead to fundamental improvements in the security situation. . . . " (page 74)

" . . . adding more American troops could conceivably worsen those aspects of the security problem that are fed by the view that the U.S. presence is intended to be a long-term 'occupation.' . . . We also rejected the immediate withdrawal of our troops, because we believe so much is at stake." (page 73)

Iran and Syria

"Given the ability of Iran and Syria to influence events within Iraq and their interest in avoiding chaos in Iraq, the United States should try to engage them constructively . . . The issue of Iran's nuclear programs should continue to be dealt with by the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council plus Germany."(p.xv)

"Iran appears content for the U.S. military to be tied down in Iraq, a position that limits U.S. options in addressing Iran's nuclear program ad allows Iran leverage over stability in Iraq." (p.28-29)

"The regional influence of Iran could rise at a time when that country is on a path to producing nuclear weapons." (p.33-34)

"Our limited contacts with Iran's government lead us to believe that its leaders are likely to say they will not participate in diplomatic efforts to support stability in Iraq . . . Nevertheless, as one of Iraq's neighbors Iran should be asked to assume its responsibility to participate in the Support Group." (page 52)


<       2        >


© 2006 The Washington Post Company