Pentagon Reviewing Three Plans For Iraq

Options Dubbed 'Go Big,' 'Go Long' & 'Go Home'; Congressman Proposes Fourth Option

(CBS/AP)  McCain said the U.S. must send an overwhelming number of troops to stabilize Iraq or face more attacks, both in the region and possibly on American soil.

"The consequences of failure are so severe that I will exhaust every possibility to try to fix this situation. Because it's not the end when American troops leave. The battleground shifts, and we'll be fighting them again," McCain said. "You read Zarqawi [the late leader of al Qaeda in Iraq], and you read [Osama] bin Laden... It's not just Iraq that they're interested in. It's the region, and then us."

President Bush says he is awaiting recommendations from the military before making a decision on the next step for Iraq.

"I haven't made any decisions about troop increases or troop decreases, and won't until I hear from a variety of sources," President Bush said Monday as he visited Indonesia.

Mr. Bush spoke a day after a bleak assessment on the Iraq war was offered by Henry Kissinger, the former Secretary of State who was heavily involved with U.S. policy on Vietnam.

Kissinger, who now runs a private consulting firm, says the U.S. should enter into dialogue with Iraq's neighbors - including Iran — to make progress in the region.

"If you mean by 'military victory' an Iraqi Government that can be established and whose writ runs across the whole country, that gets the civil war under control and sectarian violence under control in a time period that the political processes of the democracies will support, I don't believe that is possible," said Kissinger, in a BBC interview.

Several Democrats are arguing for a phased withdrawal of American forces.

Democratic Sen. Carl Levin, the incoming chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, says troop withdrawals should begin within four to six months.

Illinois Democratic Sen. Barack Obama is also calling for a "gradual and substantial" withdrawal of soldiers from Iraq.

"I believe that it remains possible to salvage an acceptable outcome to this long and misguided war," says Obama, another potential candidate for president. "But it will not be easy. For the fact is that there are no good options left in this war."

In an interview Sunday on NBC's "Today Show," Democratic Sen. Joseph Biden, the incoming chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, says the United States should "begin to let the Iraqi leadership know we're not going to be staying."

"Over the next four months, let them know we're going to start to phase out, force them to have to address the central issue. That is not 'How to stand up Iraqis,' but 'How to get Iraqis to stand together,'" said Biden. "The idea that we're going to have 140,000 troops in Iraq this time next year is just not reasonable."

Also Sunday, Democratic Rep. Charles Rangel of New York proposed a military draft, which the administration has repeatedly said it does not need.

Speaking on CBS' Face The Nation, Rangel, the incoming chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, said "this president and this administration would never have invaded Iraq, especially on the flimsy evidence that was presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a draft and members of Congress and the administration thought that their kids from their communities would be placed in harm's way."

Monday, House Speaker-Elect Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., responded to Rangel's comments.

"Mr. Rangel is a strong voice for social justice," incoming Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said Monday, adding that Rangel is making "a point about this war, that it has not involved any shared sacrifices."

Rangel says he will introduce a bill next year requiring Americans to sign up for a new military draft after turning 18. He has said the all volunteer military disproportionately puts the burden of war on minorities and lower-income families.

Asked whether the bill will come to the House floor, soon-to-be House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said: "The Speaker and I have discussed scheduling and it did not include this."

[rkb4762]

THIS WHOLE WAR MAKES US LOOK WEAK AND SORRY,
WE PARADE OUR SOLDIERS ON TV FOR ALLEGED WRONG DOING, AND IN THE MILITARY JUSTICE SYSTEM, A SOLDIER IS PRESSURED TO PLEAD GUILTY FOR A LIGHTER SENTENCE WITH THE THREAT THAT IF THEY PLEAD NOT GUILTY, THE OUTCOME WILL BE HARSH BECAUSE THE DECK IS STACKED AGAINST THEM. THE GOVERNMENT IS ONLY CONCERNED ABOUT HOW THEY LOOK ON CNN, AND FOX. THE ENTIER WORLD IS LAUGHING AT US AND THE ENAMY IS USING IT AGAINST US. WHEN WILL THIS IMPATENT GOVERNMENT LEARN.

[rkb4762]

This country has lost one important thing, it is on a campign to rid GOD, prayer or anything that gives us a moral concience above our own wicked laws. We are fighting people who have been fighting each other when America was just one big forrest, yet they worship GOD, even if there way is a based on a screwed up (kill non-muslims, blow yourself up to kill the infidels)docrine.
This mess cannot be fixed, but the American Soldier should not have to pay the price for this countrys selfish, dumb, hardheaded leadership. "SOLUTION" boost the military presence to 250,000, go on a masive brutal clean-up campaign, to take out the insurgance with hard unrelenting force, and allow the soldiers to fight the enamy unrestraigned. This might not solve the whole problem, but it will put us in a position to give that lame Government a chance, and us a chance to leave with some dignity.

[aeuropean]

Instead of "GOing BIG,"GOing LONG" or "GOing HOME" -"GO INTERNATIONAL"(example Afghanistan).
Convince the Europeans (NATO) to fight the "Terrorism" in Iraq.(Because the US ousted Saddam-a former ally in the Iraq-Iran war,another former ally from the Afghanistan-Russian war,Osama Bin Laden was able to set foot into Iraq.)
Of course,first the "yellow-belly" Germans have to be persuaded to give up patrolling save North-Afghanistan areas ,building schools and hospitals and instead learn again to kill women and children in order to get to their renegade "terrorist" fathers.
The US can then reduce their troops to a level sufficient to guard their newly-build bases and the precious oilfields they went in for in the first place.
Good Luck

[bushrocks1]

Would I send my son to this war? You might ask would I send him to WW II? Or Vietnam? Maybe you would distinguish those conflicts and whether you would send your son to fight in them. But that question is misdirected in a very important way: I can't command my son to go to war. He has to make that choice. So the better question would be: would I volunteer to fight in Iraq, WW II, Vietnam? Would I volunteer to fight in any war? Respond if drafted? I don%u2019t know. I'm not equivocating, only addressing that it is a hypothetical. As a hypothetical, I can say, sure I'd fight. But I have nightmares of battle (from my past life as a Jacobite). So how do I feel toward those who do volunteer? Impressed and maturely knowing that many things go into their decision. But I do strongly believe that a country who can't find those men is doomed. The fact that we can find them is one reason why I say there is no failure in Iraq. Objectively, I also believe it for other reasons. An attempt to establish democracy in the Middle East is a bold, brilliant, noble effort, facing a high chance of failure. That's why I greatly respect and admire those who have made the attempt--the Bush administration. They have been resolute, something I have not seen in my lifetime. They may not succeed, for reasons outside their control or fault: traitors on the home front, being a big one. But now those traitors have apparently occupied the high ground. Yet... we're still in Iraq. Why?... I'm waiting.

[zoot8]

There needs to be a change in tactics. The series of attack and retreat operations does not provide security. They should establish defensible spaces around a school or hospital or power plant with protectable perimeters and outlying sentries to prevent rocket and mortar attacks. Everyone inside the perimeter should be vouched for by someone trusted. In effect there should be multiple "Green Zones" with mutual aid and surge capacity to protect each other and the logistical supply routes. Iraquis can be trained to protect a well designed perimeter and maintain security from infiltration within the perimeter. It is not surprising that the Iraquis will not stand up because they are too vulnerable. American troops can build the infrastructure for defensible spaces that the Iraquis can defend. After they have established security, then they can go after the pockets of insurgency. This is a medieval castle tactic, but that may be what is called for in areas that are completely chaotic. There will be no progress without security.

[firststate]

radiob
the Stuarts notwithstanding, I was curious about the past life part. You're right, a little printed noise isn't always a bad thing. You are also right about taking anybody seriously who says the same thing even when it is irrelevant, oh that Bush, not bushrocks1. Are they are one and the same???

[radiob-2009]

Here is a link on Jacobites,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobitism#Political_background
Read and judge for yourself.As far as Bushrocks is concerned he is harmless and really never adds anything to the posts.Let him ramble,no one can take an individual serious who constantly paste the same post over and over with no relevance to the story.

[pakaal]

McCain may believe a 20,000 troop increase would make the difference, but most Iraqis disagree. A new report says more than 75% of both Shiites and Sunnis want us to leave Iraq within a year, expressing their belief that the US military presence provokes more violence than it prevents, and that day-to-day security would improve if the US left Iraq.

Also bear in mind that 6 in 10 Americans back withdrawal within a year. They want us out, they think we're now doing more harm than good, and the majority of us here in the US agree. So, what's the holdup?

[firststate]

bushrocks1, your single-mindedness reminds me of someone who lives at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. He also stays on message, no matter what the question, comment or situation. Could you be the same?

[firststate]

bluestardad
You are so very right and it's a @^%#*&^%* shame. Remember when more of our leaders were competent? Some will say they were more corrupt, but if so, at least they were competent. The new plans are designed to be sequential. They are: 1. Stay; 2. The; 3. Course! Hopefully we won't recognize any similarity to previous non-plans.

Our leaders should be required to visit

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/fallen/

and click on each picture. One can't help noticing the number of men and women lost in the slightly over 3 1/2 years, almost 1,300 days, since our fearless leader said "mission accomplished."

[kwch]

But gunner, that snake has 100 heads (1000 now because of Bush) and they are scattered throughout the world now, not just in the middle east.

You are never going to get or find all the heads. The best thing to do is to get the snake itself to live peacefully with you.

[frankly6]

Here's one from HOW TO BE A GOOD REPUBLICAN:

11) You have to believe that the best way to encourage military morale is praise the troops overseas while cutting their VA benefits.

[bluestardad]

These military and civilian planners are a bunch of Chimps. They sure as ever had no plan going in so now we are suppose to believe they have three plans with more credibility than before to choose from?

[frankly6]

Would I send my son to this war? You might ask would I send him to WW II? Or Vietnam? Hell no that's for poor kids to do. I do love the blood and destruction though. As long as it's someone elses son or daughter. So how do I feel toward those who do volunteer? Impressed, they either have much bigger balls than me or they are desperately poor and trying to make a better life for themselves. Either way, who cares? An attempt to establish democracy in the Middle East has proven to be very profitable for a handfull of connected individuals and companies. That's why I greatly respect and admire those who have made the attempt--the Bush administration. They have been resolute, and I really like resoluteness. They may not succeed, some say because they are arrogant and criminaly incompetent. But I say it's because we have so many traitors on the home front calling for some kind of acountability from the administration. The nerve of these peasants speaking truth to power! Who do they think they are? Thay should just shut up and send their money and children into the fight. These traitors have apparently occupied the high ground for now. But not for long..we'll find a way to blame the failures in Iraq on them.

[firststate]

bushrocks1,
What color is the sky in your world? Are you allowed to think or only paste? This waiting you're doing, is it for the mother ship to come for you? Can anyone guess the response?

[bushrocks1]

Would I send my son to this war? You might ask would I send him to WW II? Or Vietnam? Maybe you would distinguish those conflicts and whether you would send your son to fight in them. But that question is misdirected in a very important way: I can't command my son to go to war. He has to make that choice. So the better question would be: would I volunteer to fight in Iraq, WW II, Vietnam? Would I volunteer to fight in any war? Respond if drafted? I don%u2019t know. I'm not equivocating, only addressing that it is a hypothetical. As a hypothetical, I can say, sure I'd fight. But I have nightmares of battle (from my past life as a Jacobite). So how do I feel toward those who do volunteer? Impressed and maturely knowing that many things go into their decision. But I do strongly believe that a country who can't find those men is doomed. The fact that we can find them is one reason why I say there is no failure in Iraq. Objectively, I also believe it for other reasons. An attempt to establish democracy in the Middle East is a bold, brilliant, noble effort, facing a high chance of failure. That's why I greatly respect and admire those who have made the attempt--the Bush administration. They have been resolute, something I have not seen in my lifetime. They may not succeed, for reasons outside their control or fault: traitors on the home front, being a big one. But now those traitors have apparently occupied the high ground. Yet... we're still in Iraq. Why?... I'm waiting.

[frankly6]

bushrocks1

I see you can cut and paste again and again. Can you argue your point? Can you speak your own thoughts?

[gunnerv1]

I don't care about Democracy there, it'll never happen because the powers to be in the Middle East don't want it. What I do want is to wipe out Extreamist Islam and you can't do that without cutting off the head of the snake where it lives!

[gunnerv1]

We have to cut the head off of the snake or it will just keep coming. Just wait until something happens here. Can anyone say Internment camps? I'll be the first to volunteer as a guard!

[kwch]

Gunner I don't care if we win this war in Iraq and install a democracy there, they will still be coming for us. You can thank GW for this as he has trashed our reputation in the world and created thousands upon thousands of new enemies for us to deal with.

He claims that since we have not had another 9/11 that we are safer now. Anyone who believes that statement is a pure moron!