President Bush speaks during a meeting with Congressional leaders, Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2007, in the Cabinet Room of the White House in Washington. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
Posted on 09/11/2007 12:50:57 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
WASHINGTON - President Bush will tell the nation this week he plans to reduce the American troop presence in Iraq by about 30,000 by next summer, but will condition those and further cuts on continued progress, The Associated Press has learned.
In a prime-time television address, probably Thursday, Bush will endorse the recommendations of his top general and top diplomat in Iraq, following their appearance at two days of hearings in Congress, administration officials said. The White House plans to issue a written status report on the so-called "surge" on Friday, they said.
The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because Bush's speech is not yet finally drafted. White House officials were preparing the address even as the U.S. commanding general, David Petraeus, and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker were presenting arguments to stay the course in Iraq in a second day of testimony on Capitol Hill.
The reductions envisioned by the White House mirror those proposed by Petraeus and would leave approximately 130,000 U.S. troops on the ground by August, roughly the level at which they were before Bush ordered the buildup early this year, the officials said.
In the speech, the president will say he understands the deep concerns Americans have about U.S. involvement in Iraq and their desire to bring the troops home, they said. Bush will say that after hearing from Petraeus and Crocker, he has decided on a way forward that will reduce the number of troops but not abandon Iraq, they said.
The address will stake out a conciliatory tone toward Congress but Bush will place more conditions on the pace of reductions to the pre-buildup level of 130,000 than Petraeus did.
At the White House Tuesday afternoon, Bush met with House and Senate lawmakers of both parties to discuss Iraq. He publicly pledged to consider their input. "It's very important before I make up mind that I consult with leaders of the House and the Senate," he said.
This is crap.
This is crap.
They, like CNN, print the 1% that agree with their agenda...
“WASHINGTON - President Bush will tell the nation this week he plans to reduce the American troop presence in Iraq by about 30,000 by next summer, but will condition those and further cuts on continued progress, The Associated Press has learned.”
Meaningless gesture. But will be successful given the Democrats’ total ignorance about Iraqi problems. Not one question to Petraeus about no oil sharing law yet in Iraq? Just reflexive liberal anti-military bashing.
hee hee hee... i think Bush is right on the money with this
the democraps will be spinning like crazy
spinning like crazy
CNN is ..
If Iraqi security can't tolerate that bit of reduction in a year's time, it is crap.
It’s all contingent on the original plan: as Iraqi’s stand up, we will stand down.
I’ve been listening to General Patraeus all day. This reduction w/b in the surge levels, if conditions allow it.
Bookmark
By next June is still 3 months longer than the libs have claimed we have resources for. The surge was designed to end thus the name “surge”.
Main Entry: 2surge
Function: noun
1 : a swelling, rolling, or sweeping forward like that of a wave or series of waves <a surge of interest>
Definition of surge - Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
President Bush speaks during a meeting with Congressional leaders, Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2007, in the Cabinet Room of the White House in Washington. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
Cheney.. lol
Vice President Dick Cheney, right, looks on as President Bush speaks in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building in Washington, Monday, Sept. 10, 2007, prior to the ceremonial swearing-in of Budget Director Jim Nussle. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)
Somewhat unusual for the White House to announce details. Or is it? Maybe some new personnel with new ways of dealing with the Press.
It’s a new day, after all, Karl has left the building. :-)
I gave up on pretty much any chance at some decent public relations campaigns from the WH.. a long time ago.. ya never know.
MATTHEW LEE
ANNE FLAHERTY
It took two AP idiots to guess...
“...a conciliatory tone toward Congress...”
**stomach heaves***
re: “will announce another troop cut Thursday.”
is this another “leak,” or is the President telegraphing his punches again.
I hate this so-called advance information that always allows our not-so-honorable opponents a chance to tank up for the show and then hog prime time..
Petraeus has already offered his recommendations which are surge down to presurge levels ,, is what we are witnessing a ‘pre-emptive strike’ , the cat was out of the bag already, let the media whine, they will anyway , “It’s not enough,, Why not sooner?” .. ad nauseum </earplugs>
But the Democrats claim the surge has failed so there's no progress so... Bwahahaha. Seriously, though I'd support if if the military thinks it's wise at that time.
“**stomach heaves***”
And more. Damn the disappoint never ends!
If the WH is following the suggestion of Rep. Duncan Hunter to rotate Iraqi troops in with our own battalions in hot spots to get them battle-hardened, there is NO EXCUSE for the Iraqis not to be ready with 30,000+ troops to fill the void in a year’s time.
Yep....of course the Dems will think the majority of Americans won't remember this, at their own peril.
Last I read the deployment numbers are set to peak in October, and then there is Patraeus’ comment that he could send a few home by Christmas, that is being GROSSLY misreported and spun like this article.
“This is crap.”
Actually this is exactly what he said he’d do, listen to the commanders and adjust troops to the levels requested. General Patraeus said almost the same thing before Congress. Bush appears to be taking the initiative (and credit) away from Congress and announcing troop cuts dependent on conditions, just like he always said he would. It’s anything but “crap”.
““**stomach heaves***”
And more. Damn the disappoint never ends!”
I have no freak’n idea what you two are upset about. There is no apparent conciliation in this report, but if we want to pretend and announce that there is, that’s just good politics.
30,000 by next August?
Damn, the GOP just wants to lose the election.
I am sorry, but if this surge does not start to turn into real victory by December, it is time to start pulling out all troops gradually.
Yes, the surge has made a difference, but not enough to warrant only withdrawing 30,000.
I support the war, but at times you need to realize what to prioritize. There are times to realize you did your best, but it is time to quit. That is not dishonorable. If you can genuinely win, stay in it. We could have won Vietnam. But, this seems to be a situation that really should be left up to the Iraqi people pretty soon. It is THEIR country, not ours. We should help them get on their feet, but if they can’t step up to the plate, we should end our involvement and try to influence them in a non-military manner.
Feign and jab.
Cassius Clay understood the “rope a dope” strategy.
I would not bet, if I were a betting man, against the aggregate of wisdom of President Bush and his human resources.
Iran will be a smouldering heap before President Bush leaves office.
I disagree with your assessment:
If freedom is an objective in the Mideast then I submit the following:
In Europe we have maintained a military force for over 60 years and they have had freedom, peace and prosperity after two bitter and bloody wars.
In Japan we have maintained a military force for over 60 years and they have had freedom, peace and properity after a bitter and bloody war.
In South Korea we have maintained a military force for almost 47 years and they have had freedom, peace and prosperity following a bitter and bloody war. (I was there as 2nd Lt., Arty in ‘52))
In the Mid-East (Iraq) we will have to maintain miltary force for many years if they are to know freedom, peace and properity.
The fact is that the world peace makers are not politicians, not any religious leaders I know about, but the American military forces. In my life time they have successfully taken on the mantle of world peace makers. May God continue to bless those men and women wearing the American flag on their shoulder.
You got that right.Dubyah has thrown the Dems a bone, and if they were smart they would take it and STFU!
But the Dems are NOT smart. They will continue to aid and comfort the enemy, necessitating still MORE troops rather than fewer.
The Dems just do NOT get it.
If the Dems had STFU two years ago, the troops would be coming home NOW!
Its the DEM'S fault the war has gone on as long as it has!
I had to copy your words.
Truer were never spoken.
Seems to me to be rather brilliant. Immediate (December) withdrawal followed by a calendar projected phased redeployment. Most Americans want exactly that.
http://blogs.usatoday.com/gallup/2007/09/gen-petraeus-re.html
This takes the thunder away from the Democrats, while maintaining substantial flexibility on troop reductions. The Democrats are left whining about “not fast enough” or “not enough troops out”, a far less persuasive or appealing position for those in the middle. With luck, the hard core antiwar wing will continue to overplay its hand and seriously marginalize itself, reducing the threat of a precipitate withdrawal.
To those concerned about the impact of such a reduction on operations in Iraq, I simply ask you to remember that the greatest threat to the outcome of the war is not in Iraq but in Washington. Sad but true. This seems like a damn good plan to counter that threat without throwing in the towel.
I wonder if these thoughte were widespread, especially to Congress, it would make any difference?
I wonder if these thoughte were widespread, especially to Congress, it would make any difference?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.