Co-Bloggers: Katie & Bob Preview The Speech

(CBS)
Chief Washington Correspondent Bob Schieffer and Katie attended a briefing this morning at the White House, giving a preview of tonight's speech. Here’s their report of what they were told.
The plan the president will outline tonight will call for increasing the number of American military troops in Iraq by more than 20,000, a move that will force the administration to extend the tours of duty for many troops in Iraq by two to four months, according to White House officials.
In a briefing for network anchors, officials said it may also require calling some reservists and members of the National Guard to active duty.
They also said the President will acknowledge that the current policy has failed. They said the President would characterize the policy as “not working, that what was happening was not acceptable to the American people or to him.”
These officials said the President was aware that he was going against public opinion and congressional sentiment.
Those who know the President said he knew he was “sticking his neck out.”
But the President is known to feel that the country can’t afford to fail and, while he recognizes there is a consensus on that, no one—including those in Congress—has come up with a solution.
Officials say the current plan will divide Baghdad into nine neighborhoods with the majority of Iraqi military taking charge, supported by smaller numbers of U.S. forces.
Their aim is to reassure Iraqis that their own forces will be providing security.
While the President will outline his plan tonight to the American people, he will also make it clear that American patience is not unlimited. His message to the Maliki government and the Iraqi military will essentially be, “You have to perform.”
People who have been around the President in recent days say he has had it with the Iraqi government, and has told them in no uncertain terms that things have to change, that they must decide if they can live together, that they must stand up and that these messages have been delivered directly to Maliki.
White House officials also think the internal dynamics of Iraq may be working in their favor--that if Maliki can’t step up to the plate, there is competition, so he’s feeling the pressure externally and internally. They also believe that the pressure Congress is putting on the President will actually be helpful, and that it drives home to Maliki the pressure President Bush is facing.
These officials say the main thing the Maliki government needs to understand is that they could lose their primary benefactor, George Bush, if they don’t pick up their share of the burden. An interesting back story, by the way, is this: the White House says this is Maliki’s plan that was presented to the President Bush in Amman, Jordan. It was reviewed by General Casey, who added the additional US troops because the Iraqis, he felt, were not up to speed.
The President, these officials say, knows he will get some opposition from Congress, but is banking on their support because, if they cut off funding, he believes opponents will be seen as putting American troops in harm’s way. If Americans see it that way, the White House will spell it for them.
When asked about a “Plan B,” White House officials paused and said: “Maybe you should ask the Iraqi’s about their Plan B.” Clearly the onus is on Maliki and the Iraqi government, and White House officials continue to insist they believe this latest strategy, unlike its previous plans, will work.
Senate Democrats call for increase in troops: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/14/politics/14army.html?ex=1168578000&en=65adbaafab411966&ei=5070
Pelosi for the surge before she was against it: http://www.iowavoice.com/2007/01/10/pelosi-was-for-a-surge-before-she-was-against-it/
Bush Critics call for more troops: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/06/29/national/w075030D43.DTL
Reid backs temp. rise in troops:http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyID=2006-12-17T220051Z_01_N17432969_RTRUKOC_0_US-USA-IRAQ.xml
Pull the troops home. No more lies. No more false promises. No more.
Impeach if he goes against us.
ed u cates
Democrats run the serious risk of looking like they are surrendering, if they don't make this last best effort to make Iraq a success. If they choose to deny the President, then the failure of the Iraq War, and a failed Iraq State will be entirely on the heads of DEMOCRATS, AND DEMOCRATS ALONE.
Dems--have the guts to tell Bush to go to hell and do what 75% of the entire country (and, I'd say that's a majority) want-GET OUT OF IRAQ NOW !
That's great, K.T. As someone who has watched CBS news every night for twenty-five years, I am considering that suppository right now, and exactly where it should be permanently implanted. Thanks so much for your "youth-conscious excellence."
that all their sacrifice has not been for naught.
Bad leadership decisions have been written in stone through the age's. I can't see them coming
home as defeated, after all the horror they have
experienced. I know, it stays with you forever.
Remember that little "Police Action" in South East Asia. We came home to jeer's and things thrown at us, by our own people, after we saw
our best friends die. For nothing. It truly sucks.
As a responsible American, your job is to pay attention to the speech, because this is, in fact, what we will be doing to achieve success in Iraq.
Any foolish brinkmanship by the Democrats to deny funding will be paramount to the Democrats declaring defeat in Iraq, and would signal waving the white flag to Islamic radicals and terrorist, and would mean the permanent end of the Democratic Party.
My guess is the Democrats, even though they will go into hyper-sound-byte mode, and seethe about a troop increase of 22,000 - they will go along with it, purely for self-preservation of their party.
After a successful completion of the mission in Iraq, the Democrats will hold private meetings on how to claim all the credit for the success.
You, Bob and the staff are doing a great job!
It is time to leave Iraq and know that history will judge Bush and the American intervention there as a colossal mistake. Bush's legacy will be that of a fool whose pride prevented him from ending the insanity before hundred of thousands of innocents were killed or maimed.
Hopefully, the Democrats will stop this insanity but refusing to commit the funds for the proposed buildup. It is time to bring all the troops home and let the Iraqi destroy themselves in religious extremism if that is their desire.
Is this latest Bush push a save face move? God help us for giving the insurgents too much advance notice.
At this point I am unsure if there is a clear way out. Pelosi or no Pelosi.
We do need a fast track out of Iraq but our casualty losses should be our No.1 priority.
U.S. Forces have now passe 3000 lives lost. It's time to pack it up & bring our troops home. Now.
Good reportage Katie!
CHRISTIAN MEDINA
Manila Philippines
-
by stevehal007
January 11, 2007 8:19 PM PST
- Well, now that a hand full of chosen CBS staffers have done their obligatory "lovefest praises for Katie and Bob", maybe we can hear from a more-and-more infrequent viewer of CBS Nightly News. Katie and Bob have done a great job....not of reporting objectively regarding the events in Iraq, but of carrying the liberal Democratic Party's water. Why don't we question why all of the major leaders within the Democrat party (Pelosi, Reid etal) have in the recent past (like, last month) said that they would support a short-term increase in the troop numbers to get a handle on sectarian violence so that the newly formed, democratically elected government in Iraq can get a grip on controlling their own destiny...but now, these same "put their finger in the political breeze & change their mind Democrat leaders are now opposed to the idea??? Seems like that would be a good news story. Oh, your report on the murder rate in New Orleans raises an interesting question...at the current rate of 5.6 homicides per 100,000 population nationaly, we experience roughly 16,800 murders in this country annually. That's 46 murders per day. Question: why don't you post the daily U.S. murder count along with the daily soldier fatalities??? Might keep things in perspective. We have lost over 70,000 of our people to needless murders compared to the noble loss of 3,000 honorable soldiers defending against a ruthless enemy.
-
Reply to this comment
-
See all 19 Comments