V-day in Iraq?
It doesn't matter who's right. If all sides agree on an Iraq drawdown, then claim victory and get out.
LA Times editorial
July 22, 2008
The combined forces of domestic political pressure in the United States and an increasingly confident government in Iraq are creating a rare opportunity in our protracted conquest of that country -- the chance for consensus. It is time for hard-liners on all sides of the issue to back down and agree on a responsible, orderly withdrawal of U.S. forces, to begin forthwith.
That sensible approach won favor last week in camps rarely allied with one another. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama signaled his willingness to break with critics of the war who demand immediate withdrawal and instead proposed a deliberate drawdown, though still in line with his long-held goal of bringing the troops home within 16 months of taking office. In Iraq, meanwhile, Prime Minister Nouri Maliki indicated that he too wants U.S. troops out; on Monday, a government spokesman cited a 2010 deadline. The Bush administration, which has resisted specific timetables, reportedly put pressure on Maliki not to endorse Obama's plan. Yet the administration appears for the first time to be prepared to contemplate an end to the U.S. military presence in Iraq. (President Bush still avers the term "timetable," opting for "time horizon." Fine.) Even GOP candidate John McCain, once content to imagine Americans in Iraq for the next 100 years, welcomed the announcement, though he continued to stake out the inarguable position that no timetable should turn on politics.
In short, despite their different emphases, the leaders of both countries and the leading candidates to succeed Bush now jointly accept the notion of a phased withdrawal under at least a vague timetable. That is what passes for a breakthrough in this long war.
(Continued here.)
LA Times editorial
July 22, 2008
The combined forces of domestic political pressure in the United States and an increasingly confident government in Iraq are creating a rare opportunity in our protracted conquest of that country -- the chance for consensus. It is time for hard-liners on all sides of the issue to back down and agree on a responsible, orderly withdrawal of U.S. forces, to begin forthwith.
That sensible approach won favor last week in camps rarely allied with one another. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama signaled his willingness to break with critics of the war who demand immediate withdrawal and instead proposed a deliberate drawdown, though still in line with his long-held goal of bringing the troops home within 16 months of taking office. In Iraq, meanwhile, Prime Minister Nouri Maliki indicated that he too wants U.S. troops out; on Monday, a government spokesman cited a 2010 deadline. The Bush administration, which has resisted specific timetables, reportedly put pressure on Maliki not to endorse Obama's plan. Yet the administration appears for the first time to be prepared to contemplate an end to the U.S. military presence in Iraq. (President Bush still avers the term "timetable," opting for "time horizon." Fine.) Even GOP candidate John McCain, once content to imagine Americans in Iraq for the next 100 years, welcomed the announcement, though he continued to stake out the inarguable position that no timetable should turn on politics.
In short, despite their different emphases, the leaders of both countries and the leading candidates to succeed Bush now jointly accept the notion of a phased withdrawal under at least a vague timetable. That is what passes for a breakthrough in this long war.
(Continued here.)
Powered by Blogger
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home