Bush Hears New Perspectives On Iraq

Bipartisan Panel Discusses Iraq War With President, Other Officials

(CBS/AP)  President Bush met Monday with a bipartisan group seeking consensus on a new approach for the war in Iraq amid widespread agreement that the administration's current efforts have not worked well enough or fast enough.

"I'm not going to prejudge," Mr. Bush said of the report.

Mr. Bush said the goal in Iraq still is "a government that can sustain and defend itself" and said "the best military options depend on conditions on the ground."

"I'm not sure what the report is going to say. I look forward to seeing it," Mr. Bush told reporters in the Oval Office at the conclusion of a separate meeting he had with visiting Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.

But two ideas under consideration by the commission illustrate the challenges of reaching consensus on a way forward, CBS News chief White House correspondent Jim Axelrod reports. One is a phased withdrawal of troops. The other is engaging Syria and Iran more directly in bringing peace to Iraq. Former Secretary of State James A. Baker himself has raised that idea.

Earlier, White House press secretary Tony Snow described the meeting as a conversation in which both sides shared views. "This is not a deposition," Snow said. Further, he said there was not a presentation of alternatives but rather an assessment of the situation on the ground now.

The president talked in the Oval Office with members of the Iraq Study Group, headed by Baker and former Democratic congressman Lee Hamilton. The group is to release its findings before the end of the year.

The study group was spending the day at the White House speaking with members of Mr. Bush's national security team, including Vice President Dick Cheney, National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, National Intelligence Director John Negroponte, CIA Director Michael Hayden, U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalizad and Gen. George Casey, the top U.S. commander in Iraq.

Cheney, Hadley and chief of staff John Bolten took part in the meeting with Mr. Bush.

While Mr. Bush appears ready to change his tone on the Iraq war and listen to new ideas, there are two big hurdles facing the group regarding any kind of compromise: reaching a consensus and getting the president to accept what they come up with, reports CBS senior White House correspondent Bill Plante.

The Democrat in line to become chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee offered a grim assessment Monday on the situation in Iraq, accusing the administration of ignoring the reality that "we're getting deeper and deeper into a hole — that we should stop digging and that we should look for alternatives in order to promote the chances of success in Iraq."

Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan said the study group's report "is going to have an impact on whatever action might be possible in this Congress and in the next Congress," when Democrats take control. Levin said earlier that U.S. troops should begin coming home in phases within four to six months, a loose timetable that other Democratic leaders have not endorsed.

Even before it is finished, the study group's report is seen by many as having huge stakes. It could give the Democratic and Republican parties a chance at consensus — or at least a tenable framework for agreement — after an election that gave Democrats congressional control and reshaped Mr. Bush's final two years in office.

"For the President to incorporate the ideas of the Iraq Study Group, including the not-yet-formal proposal to engage Iran and Syria, there will have to be some serious backpedaling," said CBS News foreign affairs analyst Pamela Falk from the U.N., "particularly since the Administration's position on the Security Council sanctions negotiations continues to be to further isolate Iran."

Meanwhile, Gen. John Abizaid, head of the U.S. Central Command, met Monday with the Iraqi prime minister to "reaffirm President Bush's commitment" to success in Iraq, the government said.

[tibu987]

It is scary to me how easily stupid ideas are tossed about by people that seem to have no sensible approach to the Iraq problem while our young Americans and innocent Iraqi's are killed. Does anyone in Washington or the UN have any idea as to how we can end this massacre without the loss of more lives?

[exusmcsgt]

As I have observed often, a good leader unites our allies and divides our enemies. Bush has done just the opposite......

[huskerarmy]

"If you don't think we're fighting terrorists in Iraq, you're nuts."

Of course we are... and once again the righties are arguing against the straw man. Regardless, the fact that there are now terrorists in Iraq has nothing to do with 911. Look past the talking point and slogans. We invaded a sovereign country, drew a line in the sand and said, in effect, "Come fight us here so that Iraqi civilians will die in lieu of Americans." The result is a bloody civil war, an Iraqi population that wants us to leave immediately and is ever more resentful, a recruiting bonanza and "cause celeb" for the terrorists. All in all, not good for the prospects of future homeland security.

[exusmcsgt]

newster1-

Not a single Iraqi was involved in the 9/11 attack. The majority were Saudis. By your rational we should then invade and occupy Saudi Arabia as well as a form of retribution.

[lestb35]

If you don't think we're fighting terrorists in Iraq, you're nuts. They are radical islamic extremists and they want us to die. Jihad is declared and there's no going back. It's you guys that can't get off the "no WMD's" chant. Who's stuck? Move on, dude. Not moveon.org

[huskerarmy]

"Think about it!!!!!! People tend to forget that New York was attacked...people died. So what do you all propose? Sit back....wait it out...get hit by them again? Allow...the Jihad..their civil rights???"

Exoticona,

You and your ilk keep trying to make that connection between Iraq and 911 by shear will. The days of collective guilt by lumping people together of similar ethnic or social backgrtound are obsolete. Think about it. If you could have made even a circumstantial connection between Iraq and 911, don't you think the results of the election would have gone more to your liking? Do you really think the American people just want to hide from the terrorists? To the contrary, Americans want to address the real issue of terrorism and homeland security and have rejected the fabricated distraction that is Iraq.

[olebd]

Translation:

"Help! Me and ma daddy are out of idears"

[arthurcl1]

The Democrat in line to become chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee offered a grim assessment Monday on the situation in Iraq, accusing the administration of ignoring the reality that "we're getting deeper and deeper into a hole %u2014 that we should stop digging and that we should look for alternatives in order to promote the chances of success in Iraq."

[mh4cbs1]

McCain and Lieberman want MORE troops to go to Iraq to return dead or maimed fighting in a needless horrific War OF Terror.

Time for these politicians to STOP sending middle class kids off to fight and die in their imperial Wars for power and profit.

Iraq was NOT a threat. Bush/Cheney Neocons exploited 9-11 to scare and lie their way into a War they wanted from the day they took power in 2000 (read PNAC papers).

NOW Democrats need to STOP this Insanity NOW

[feelfree1]

And now a message to our troops:

"Do not fight for a dying regime. It is not worth your life." (former Governor George W. Bush, March, 2003)

www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxKpeKQA6B4

(Speakers on)

[feelfree1]

And part 2:

"Do not fight for a dying regime. It is not worth your life." (pResident Bush)

www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNuefnjwbJ0&mode=related&search=

[rharrin1]

jiminoregon

Nobody could have said it better, good post.

Look what happened here church and state do not mix the last six years proves that.

[rharrin1]

pakaal

NO just serve them the same dish they like to serve.

[kaliveotin]

Establish Large Mega bases near the boarders of IRAN and SYRIA, and ABSOLUTELY STOP the incursion of anti-American forces into IRAQ. Triple the number of special forces in Bagdad and Anwar province to uproot the bombers and other insurgent forces. Disarm and dismantle the Militias which are causing most of the civil strife, both Sheite and Sunni. Distroy them if necessary. Neutralize or distroy the most violent and radical extreemists in IRAQ, no matter the consequences. So far we have been acting like sitting ducks, failing to find and take out the forces which are regularly killing Americans. We know who the radicals are, both sheite and Sunni, so far we have shown little will to make them pay. For example, WHY HAVE WE FAILED TO ACT AGAINST MURDERERS IN SADIR CITY?

[pakaal]

jiminoregon, you said "I am referring to the difference between Sunni and Shiite."

Although the historical difference comes from what you mention, the divide between the two groups comes from the Sunni being the "upper class" and keeping the Shi'a oppressed. The historical reason for the split was religious but the hatred and killing now comes from Saddam Hussein (Sunni) hating and killing the Shiites. It's certainly NOT as simple as a doctrinal difference within Islam, it has everything to do with repression and killing of one group by the other for decades.

[pakaal]

If they are not christians shoot them, blow them up, cut their heads off, if they love christ let them live.

rharrin1, you've managed to perfectly mirror EXACTLY what the terrorists say, just substitute Mohammed for Christ! Nothing like a little religious fanaticism on both sides to make a war really interesting, eh?

[nothappyatall]

Posted by exoticona: "People tend to forget that New York was attacked...people died. So what do you all propose? Sit back....wait it out...get hit by them again?"

Bush has made this WORSE, people died, but Bush killed 3,000 more of our guys and caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands MORE, he has crated more anger resentment and quest for REVENGE, People held now 5 years in jail without charges are now all enemies who will love to see us fry. There WILL be another 9/11 guaranteed because we have not changed one thing we did that CAUSED it in the first place!

http://www.bushisantichrist.com

http://iraqforsale.org/

The story of what happens to everyday Americans when corporations go to war.
Acclaimed director Robert Greenwald (Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price, Outfoxed, and Uncovered) takes you inside the lives of soldiers, truck drivers, widows and children who have been changed forever as a result of profiteering in the reconstruction of Iraq. Iraq for Sale uncovers the connections between private corporations making a killing in Iraq and the decision makers who allow them to do so.

[nothappyatall]

Posted by exoticona: "Gee can't any of you people out there stop the Bush bashing. The media, and all those Bush haters"

Well THERES *** GOOD reason for all of it, all this is calling the shots LIKE IT IS, if you want to be a dimwit and continue standing up for this Bush moron and his lies, be my guest but his popularity is now only 31%- thats his xtian right winger support group who worships at his feet because he can do NO wrong

Posted by exoticona:
"can't you guys like come up with something like possibly relay a possible solution to this mess? "

SURE can hon, we give the Iraqi Govt notice to solve THEIR internal problems pronto and then we pull out 5,000 troops a week till they are all out of there. We have failed over there, this was an unwinnable war with no plan and no goals. Saddam is gone, let the rest of the people there battle it out amongst themselves.

Posted by exoticona:
"No one likes War! But if one really thought long and hard about our history, we would all know that it's the Veteran who has given us Liberty.."

WRONG, Bush and his cronies at HALIBURTON and other non bid contractors *LOVE* war, it lines their bank accounts from those $45 6 packs of pepsi's and $100 per soldier laundry to name two items they rip us off on. How about the contractor's $200,000 a year truck drivers driving $19,000 soldiers around over there?


http://www.bushisantichrist.com

[jimc52]

A lot of blood has been spilled over religious matters in two thousand years, not just in Islam.
Christians are just as guilty, all the way up to the Irish and British, over being Protestant or Catholic. The point of the matter is, no matter who gets killed, God hasn't changed his/her position. We are all here, despite all the killing, God is still here and most of us, who do not have religious hatred in our hearts are still asking, when are all of you going to get over it? God is asking you the same question.
Whether you say "God is One," or "God is Great," or God whatever, it doesn't do any good if all you have is murder in your hearts.

There won't be an answer to Iraq until Islam decides to settle their dispute and put aside once and for all, a difference which cannot be settled by murder. The Iraqi people have to find a way to see past their tribal and cultural differences towards a national cause which unifies them. I'll tell you this much: there won't be any peace until there is mutual RESPECT.
I think the answer lies within Islam in general,
which is a far more difficult problem than the Iraq question alone.

[jimc52]

Really. It's unbelievable. I am referring to the difference between Sunni and Sheite. Here is the difference:

Muhammad never designated who should be his successor as leader of Islam. After his death, Muslim leaders quickly decided that Muhammad's friend and father-in-law, Abu Bakr, should be caliph (chief executive, commander-in-chief, chief justice and leader, imam, of public worship). Abu Bakr was one of the first converts to Islam. The first four successors of Muhammad are called the "rightly guided caliphs." The fourth, 'Ali, was Muhammad's cousin. Ali was assassinated by fanatics in favor of Mu'awiya of the Umayyad family being the leader. Hasan and Husayn, sons of 'Ali and Muhammad's daughter, Fatima, were the surviving male heirs of Muhammad. Because of special interest in the family of Muhammad, there had been a "faction (shi'a) of 'Ali" that felt he and his descendants were the obvious successors. The Shi'ites call their leaders imams rather than caliphs, tracing them down through a number of generations from Imam 'Ali.
In all other important respects, the Shi'ites share the same story with the Sunnites, the majority group in Islam that looks to the four rightly guided caliphs as the proper successors to Muhammad.

Source(s):
The Sacred Paths of the West, Theodore M. Ludwig

And this is the only reason for killing each other...over something done almost 13 centuries ago? Unbelievable! Just incredible. Why not get OVER IT? Is this a reason to kill each other?