Archive   |   Live Q&As   |   RSS Feeds RSS   |   E-mail Dan  |  
Page 2 of 5   <       >

The Lost Year

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.

"Such a shift, the report says, would 'erode security gains achieved thus far' and could return Iraq to a downward spiral of sectarian violence. . . .

"White House officials said that the assessment was evidence that the American troop increase had begun to dampen violence in Iraq, that progress was possible and that a precipitous troop withdrawal would sow chaos.

"Democrats said the report showed that the White House had failed in its effort to use the troop increase to promote political progress in Iraq, and that it was time for the United States to change course."

Walter Pincus writes in The Washington Post: "The report for the first time examined a key part of the current U.S. effort -- the arming of Sunni tribal leaders who have joined in the fight against al-Qaeda in Iraq. It depicted the impact as limited, noting that although Sunni tribal resistance to al-Qaeda fighters has expanded, particularly in al-Anbar province, it 'has not yet translated into broad Sunni Arab support for the Iraqi government or widespread willingness to work with the Shia.'

"The report notes that Shiite leaders are divided on the initiative. Some in Baghdad are concerned that newly armed Sunni tribes 'will ultimately side with armed opponents of the government,' while others have allowed Sunnis against al-Qaeda to join Interior and Defense Ministry forces.

"Although the potential remains for these Sunni tribal groups fighting al-Qaeda to emerge as a basis for a 'bottom-up' political accommodation, that will occur only 'if the Iraqi government accepts and supports them,' the report said.

"If that does not happen, and U.S. forces draw down, the empowered local Sunni tribal groups 'could become strong enough to join together to challenge the national government in some geographic areas,' the senior intelligence official told reporters."

Here's the full text of the report.

The Warner Challenge

One of the great contradictions of Bush's Iraq policy has been his repeated insistence that the U.S. commitment there is not open-ended -- while at the same time refusing to describe a plausible scenario under which it will conclude.

Peter Baker and Jonathan Weisman write in The Washington Post: "Sen. John W. Warner, one of the most influential Republican voices in Congress on national security, called on President Bush yesterday to begin withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq in time for Christmas. . . .

"At his Capitol Hill news conference, Warner, a former Navy secretary and Senate Armed Services Committee chairman, threw Bush's own words back at him by noting that the president has said the U.S. commitment in Iraq must not be 'open-ended.' Warner said it is time for the president to come up with an 'orderly and carefully planned withdrawal,' suggesting that Bush 'send a sharp and clear message' to the Iraqis by announcing a pullout plan by Sept. 15 -- one that would involve at least a symbolic fraction of the 160,000 troops coming home by the holidays. . . .

"The White House politely rejected Warner's advice, saying any decisions would wait until after [Army Gen. David H.] Petraeus's presentation next month."


<       2              >


© 2007 Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive