NationStates Jolt Archive


Us Report: Iraqi Government misses every siingle benchmark

Liuzzo
10-07-2007, 04:49
Now every time I speak out and say that this war is going terribly wrong and it lays at the feet of the POTUS and his administration I get the usual detractors saying "there's so much progress being made. REALLY!" One of these people is someone I actually respect due to our common bond of service, USMC2. Oddly he's been missing from the forums lately and I pray that he is well and has not been sent back over there again for another tour. F&G, New Mit, DK EO RO and every other incarnation of that same troll all say, "but there's so much progress being made you really have to stop trusting the liberal media." I've been there, and while there are some incredible individual gains that have been made the overall situation just gets worse and worse. This report repudiates the facts on the ground to be in direct opposition to that "progress" line of crap they try to sell. I know they may come flocking to this thread with their same line of crap but really fellas, how many times do you need to read the writing on the wall?

link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070710/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq)



By ANNE FLAHERTY and ANNE GEARAN, Associated Press Writer 2 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - A progress report on Iraq will conclude that the U.S.-backed government in Baghdad has not met any of its targets for political, economic and other reforms, speeding up the Bush administration's reckoning on what to do next, a U.S. official said Monday.
ADVERTISEMENT

The "pivot point" for addressing the matter will no longer be Sept. 15, as initially envisioned, when a full report on Bush's so-called "surge" plan is due, but instead will come this week when the interim mid-July assessment is released, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the draft is still under discussion.

But another senior official said Bush's advisers, along with the president, decided last week there was not enough evidence from Iraq to justify a change now in current policy.

They had launched discussions about how to react to the erosion of support for the president's Iraq approach among prominent Republicans, that official said, and the debate was part of a broader search for a way out of a U.S. combat presence in Iraq by the end of Bush's presidency.

The second official said the decision was to wait for the September report — one originally proposed by Defense Secretary Robert Gates and other administration officials, and then enshrined into law by Congress — before deciding whether any course shift is warranted. The official spoke on condition of anonymity so he could talk more freely about internal deliberations.

The July report, required by law, is expected to be delivered to Capitol Hill by Thursday or Friday, as the Senate takes up a $649 billion defense policy bill and votes on a Democratic amendment ordering troop withdrawals to begin in 120 days.

The second administration official said the report "will present a picture of satisfactory progress on some benchmarks and not on others."

Also being drafted are several Republican-backed proposals that would force a new course in Iraq, including one by Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Ben Nelson, D-Neb., that would require U.S. troops to abandon combat missions. Collins and Nelson say their binding amendment would order the U.S. mission to focus on training the Iraqi security forces, targeting al-Qaida members and protecting Iraq's borders.

"My goal is to redefine the mission and set the stage for a significant but gradual drawdown of our troops next year," said Collins.

GOP support for the war has eroded steadily since Bush's decision in January to send some 30,000 additional troops to Iraq. At the time, Bush said the Iraqis agreed to meet certain benchmarks, such as enacting a law to divide the nation's oil reserves.

This spring, Congress agreed to continue funding the war through September but demanded that Bush certify on July 15 and again on Sept. 15 that the Iraqis were living up to their political promises or forgo U.S. aid dollars.

The official said it is highly unlikely that Bush will withhold or suspend aid to the Iraqis based on the report.

A draft version of the administration's progress report circulated among various government agencies in Washington on Monday.

White House Press Secretary Tony Snow on Monday tried to lower expectations on the report, contending that all of the additional troops had just gotten in place and it would be unrealistic to expect major progress by now.

"You are not going to expect all the benchmarks to be met at the beginning of something," Snow said. "I'm not sure everyone's going to get an `A' on the first report."

In recent weeks, the White House has tried to shore up eroding GOP support for the war.

Collins and five other GOP senators — Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, Robert Bennett of Utah, John Sununu of New Hampshire and Pete Domenici of New Mexico — support separate legislation calling on Bush to adopt as U.S. policy recommendations by the Iraq Study Group, which identified a potential redeployment date of spring 2008.

Other prominent Republican senators, including Richard Lugar of Indiana, George Voinovich of Ohio, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Olympia Snowe of Maine, also say the U.S. should begin redeployments.

Several GOP stalwarts, including Sens. Ted Stevens of Alaska, Christopher Bond of Missouri, Jon Kyl of Arizona and James Inhofe of Oklahoma, said they still support Bush's Iraq strategy.

Kyl said he would try to focus this week's debate on preserving vital anti-terrorism programs, including the detention of terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. The defense bill is on track to expand the legal rights of those held at the military prison, and many Democrats want to propose legislation that would shut the facility.

"If Democrats use the defense authorization bill to pander to the far left at the expense of our national security, they should expect serious opposition from Republicans," Kyl said.

As the Senate debate began, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee arranged to run television commercials in four states, beginning Tuesday, to pressure Republicans on the war.

The ads are to run in Kentucky, Maine, Minnesota and New Hampshire, according to knowledgeable officials, but the DSCC so far has committed to spending a relatively small amount of money, less than $100,000 in all. Barring a change in plans that means the ads would not be seen widely in any of the four states.

The targets include Sens. Norm Coleman of Minnesota, Collins of Maine, Sununu of New Hampshire and the Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. All face re-election next year.

The boost in troop levels in Iraq has increased the cost of war there and in Afghanistan to $12 billion a month, with the overall tally for Iraq alone nearing a half-trillion dollars, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, which provides research and analysis to lawmakers.

The figures call into question the Pentagon's estimate that the increase in troop strength and intensifying pace of operations in Baghdad and Anbar province would cost $5.6 billion through the end of September.

__

Associated Press reporters Pauline Jelinek, Andrew Taylor, Matthew Lee and Jennifer Loven contributed to this report.


I'm going to bed folks but I'll e back to check on this in the morning. Until then Good night and God Bless.
Zilam
10-07-2007, 05:01
All this means is that Bush will say that this is news showing that we need to stay there longer, with more troops, and funding, because if we add more troops, and so on, they will meet the bench marks eventually...

Unfortunately for those that believe that load of BS, it will never get better, until every last troop is out of Iraq,and until the Iraqi people actually stand up for themselves against insurgents, and extremists.
Non Aligned States
10-07-2007, 05:37
Unfortunately for those that believe that load of BS, it will never get better, until every last troop is out of Iraq,and until the Iraqi people actually stand up for themselves against insurgents, and extremists.

Or maybe it won't get better period?

At the end of the day, either an radical Islamist will rise to power on sectarian blood or an Iranian backed dictator will.
Gauthier
10-07-2007, 06:25
Or maybe it won't get better period?

At the end of the day, either an radical Islamist will rise to power on sectarian blood or an Iranian backed dictator will.

And they said the Vietnam comparison is full of shit...
Cannot think of a name
10-07-2007, 06:44
I don't know anything about the people here...Liuzzo was in Iraq? Come to think of it, all I know is that there is a poster named 'Liuzzo" and that if it wasn't right beneath me I'd spell it "Luizzo".


By ANNE FLAHERTY and ANNE GEARAN, Associated Press Writer 2 minutes ago


That's the quickest zero-to-pissed on record.
Liuzzo
10-07-2007, 16:17
I don't know anything about the people here...Liuzzo was in Iraq? Come to think of it, all I know is that there is a poster named 'Liuzzo" and that if it wasn't right beneath me I'd spell it "Luizzo".


That's the quickest zero-to-pissed on record.

Yes, it's spelled Liuzzo and I'm not pissed at the moment. I spent just under a year in that lovely place as I am a Res Officer in the USMC who will be getting out as soon as my time is through (end of next May). After that I'll spend my time in the ready until I am officially done with my involvement. I love the Marines but do not like the way we are being used. In the past I have given out more personal information about myself but I think it prudent to wait until I am out of uniform altogether to do so considering a less than honorable is not my goal.

As to my original post... What progress is being made that is substantial? I've seen the faces of some of the people who are happy to not be living under Saddam. They enjoy that we have given them electricity for most of the day and that things are better than before. They fear us leaving because they believe it will get worse before it gets better, or maybe even just get worse until it descends into hell. This is a majority of the population that I speak of. The rest don't care if we are there or actively want to kill us. Sounds like a nice place to call home right?

Progress benchmarks are set to...well determine of progress is being made. Anyone here who has attempted to roach a goal probably set up some progress indicators along the way to ensure they were getting closer to that end. If they failed to make them they either worked harder or gave up. Progress indicators were set for Iraq based on political, social, and economic goals. They have continually failed to meet these standards even after we lower them. Are we to believe Iraqis are a failure and unable to lead themselves to a positive end? What do you all think about the situation?
Fleckenstein
10-07-2007, 16:20
Yes, it's spelled Liuzzo and I'm not pissed at the moment. I spent just under a year in that lovely place as I am a Res Officer in the USMC who will be getting out as soon as my time is through (end of next May). After that I'll spend my time in the ready until I am officially done with my involvement. I love the Marines but do not like the way we are being used. In the past I have given out more personal information about myself but I think it prudent to wait until I am out of uniform altogether to do so considering a less than honorable is not my goal.

As to my original post... What progress is being made that is substantial? I've seen the faces of some of the people who are happy to not be living under Saddam. They enjoy that we have given them electricity for most of the day and that things are better than before. They fear us leaving because they believe it will get worse before it gets better, or maybe even just get worse until it descends into hell. This is a majority of the population that I speak of. The rest don't care if we are there or actively want to kill us. Sounds like a nice place to call home right?

Progress benchmarks are set to...well determine of progress is being made. Anyone here who has attempted to roach a goal probably set up some progress indicators along the way to ensure they were getting closer to that end. If they failed to make them they either worked harder or gave up. Progress indicators were set for Iraq based on political, social, and economic goals. They have continually failed to meet these standards even after we lower them. Are we to believe Iraqis are a failure and unable to lead themselves to a positive end? What do you all think about the situation?

Good luck on getting out. I hope they let you.
Remote Observer
10-07-2007, 16:31
Or maybe it won't get better period?

At the end of the day, either an radical Islamist will rise to power on sectarian blood or an Iranian backed dictator will.

Yes to the first point.

No to the second.

In the case of us leaving (which I believe we should, and as rapidly as possible), a massive civil war will break out, and in the ensuing chaos, Turkey and Iran will be inextricably drawn into the maelstrom (and maybe a few Gulf states).

Unlike us, they can't "leave".

The war will rage on for decades.
Nivalc
10-07-2007, 16:35
And they said the Vietnam comparison is full of shit...

thats because it is filled with shit! the comparison is so bad, it is not even funny. perronally, i blame MTV...