Bush Pushes Diplomacy Amid Iraq Pressure

President Turns To Allies As Security Adviser Says Iraq Conflict Intensifies

(CBS/AP)  President Bush intensified diplomatic efforts on Monday to quell rising violence in Iraq and Afghanistan, turning to allies as his national security adviser said the conflict in Iraq had entered "a new phase" that requires changes.

"Obviously, everyone would agree things are not proceeding well enough or fast enough," National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley told reporters aboard Air Force One as Mr. Bush flew eastward.

The president was spending Monday night in this tiny Baltic nation ahead of a two-day NATO summit in Riga, Latvia, expected to deal with deteriorating conditions in Afghanistan, where NATO has 32,000 troops.

Both Estonia and Latvia are former Soviet republics that are strong allies in the war on terror.

President Bush will head to Amman, Jordan, for talks Wednesday and Thursday with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and King Abdullah of Jordan.

From Air Force One, the president spoke to the leaders of France and Egypt.

Addressing the upcoming meetings with al-Maliki, Hadley said, "We're clearly in a new phase characterized by an increase in sectarian violence that requires us to adapt to that new phase."

Mr. Bush and al-Maliki "need to be talking about how to do that and what steps Iraq needs to take and how we can support" Iraq's leaders, Hadley said.

The White House doesn't want to use the term "civil war," because it's the next category of chaos, CBS News chief White House correspondent Jim Axelrod reports. There's also a huge difference between U.S. troops engaged in a noble mission like bringing democracy to a region and being caught in another country's civil war.

In the U.S., the Iraq Study Group, a 10-member commission led by former Secretary of State James A. Baker III and former Democratic Rep. Lee Hamilton of Indiana, was working on a set of strategies for Iraq.

Hadley rejected suggestions that Iraq had already spiraled into a civil war and said it was unlikely President Bush would address with the Iraqi leader the issue of any U.S. troop withdrawals. "We're not at the point where the president is going to be in a position to lay out a comprehensive plan," Hadley said.

Mr. Bush received a briefing Sunday night at the White House from Vice President Dick Cheney, who went to Saudi Arabia over the weekend as part of the administration's expanded efforts to draw Iraq's neighbors into the search for a solution.

In further signs of a worsening situation, a mortar attack ignited a huge fire Monday night at an oil facility in northern Iraq, shutting the flow of crude oil to a major refinery. And a U.S. Air Force jet crashed in Anbar Province, a hotbed of the Sunni-Arab insurgency, officials said. Al-Jazeera reported that the pilot was killed.

Meanwhile, Britain said it expects to withdraw many of its 7,000 military personnel from Iraq by the end of next year, and Poland and Italy announced the impending withdrawal of their remaining troops as well.

In the U.S., the Iraq Study Group, a 10-member commission led by former Secretary of State James A. Baker III and former Democratic Rep. Lee Hamilton of Indiana, was working on a set of strategies for Iraq.

The most dramatic option on the table is an increase of up to 20,000 American troops in an effort to keep a lid on the violence, CBS News national security correspondent David Martin reports. The Army is now studying how it could accomplish such a buildup and how long it could sustain it.

One source close to the group predicted they would produce a unanimous report — or nothing at all, Martin reports.

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan discussed the situation in Iraq on Monday afternoon in a teleconference with members of the group, which was meeting in Washington.

The president is expected to urge NATO members to increase military spending at the summit in Riga. Violence has increased markedly in recent days, particularly in the southern part of Afghanistan, where the Taliban are resurgent.

Mr. Bush is trying to persuade many European allies to contribute more for the Afghanistan effort. He'll also promote his plan to invite several major non-NATO countries, including Japan, Australia and South Korea, into some joint missions with NATO.

President Bush is the first sitting U.S. president to visit Estonia.

His brief stopover in this medieval capital was seen as a token of American gratitude for the Baltic ally's strong support in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

Unlike in most of Europe, there is hardly any public criticism here of Mr. Bush's administration or the Iraq war. A small protest by anarchists was planned in Tallinn on Tuesday but was not expected to cause any major disruption.

President Bush will meet with Estonian Prime Minister Andrus Ansip and U.S.-educated President Toomas Hendrik Ilves. Bush and Ilves planned a joint news conference.

Mr. Bush also was expected to meet democracy activists and Estonian soldiers who have served on foreign missions.

Aides said the president also spoke by phone from Air Force One to Chinese President Hu Jintao on relations between the two countries and their recent meeting on the sidelines of a summit in Vietnam of Asian-Pacific nations.

[sandy5274]

Let's face this creep bushrocs1 is probably one
of the braindead Bush twins,so shall we have a
contest to decide which one here? ..If you think
bushrocs1 is really Jenna Bush please post her
name and if you think bushrocs1 is really Barbara
Bush Junior post her name! And the winner gets to
go destroy bushrocs1 computer and to help put
bushrocs1 back in the straijacket again!...There
that ought to drive bushrocs1 wild,right?...LOL..

[vamecegr]

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. To a hypothetical, I can answer, 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 that 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. Now those traitors have apparently occupied the high ground. Yet... we're still in Iraq. Why?...I'm waiting.

[frankly6]

If you find the posting and re-posting of the same message by Bushrocks1 pointless and counterproductive, just click on "report this comment" below his post and report it.

[leo261]

bushrocks-

you just watch tv, maybe read a paper, but
ignorance becomes you.

[txgs33]

Dude! You have got to be freakin kiddin me. Tinker3478 got you down to a tee. Oh well. A stupid is, is a stupid does!

[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. To a hypothetical, I can answer, 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 that 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. Now those traitors have apparently occupied the high ground. Yet... we're still in Iraq. Why?...I'm waiting.

[txgs33]

-bushrocks1-

What the hell? Is it just me or am I seeing this same post all over cbsnews.com? What gives? Did you shoot your intellectual wad on this one post and now got nothing creative left for the rest of this year?

[mh4cbs1]

FIVE MILES OF KILLED US TROOPS

If the coffins of our 2,875 dead troops and the 600 dead US civilian contractors, who were sacrificed in Iraq, were laid end-to-end they would stretch for 5 miles.

Imagine that next time you are driving along the highway.

NOW do you want to JAIL Bush and Cheney for LYING us into their needless, horrific War OF Terror?

[frankly6]

If you find the posting and re-posting of the same message by Bushrocks1 pointless and counterproductive, just click on "report this comment" below his post and report it.

[patriotic9]

Tinker3478
You are awsome,lol.You've been doin great job so far.What a profiling,wow.

[mh4cbs1]

Bush? Diplomacy?

Give us a break here! Bush is not going to leave Iraq without a US-corporate-friendly regime in place. No matter the US dead. No matter the Iraqi dead. No matter the increase risks to US security.

The NeoCons went in with imperial mission of power and profit and they are not leaving. period.

Read their PNAC world vision in their own words. Look who signed it. (just google PNAC)

The news that the Bush War cheerleading media like CBS won't cover.

[mh4cbs1]

Bush? Diplomacy?

Give us a break here! Bush is not going to leave Iraq without a US-corporate-friendly regime in place. No matter the US dead. No matter the Iraqi dead. No matter the increase risks to US security.

The NeoCons went in with imperial mission of power and profit and they are not leaving. period.

Read their PNAC world vision in their own words. Look who signed it. (just google PNCA)

The news that the Bush War cheerleading media like CBS won't cover.

[tinker3478]

Let's see if we can profile ****rocks, shall we? He is a white male between the ages of 45 and 60. Obviously, he is educated as obnoxious as he may seem. He possibly has a high IQ; it's hard to tell. He probably doesn't have a son since he is so eager for the war to continue. He is disabled and/or unemployed because he can be on these sites any hour of the day or night. Because he has a computer with internet service, someone in the household works-either a wife or girlfriend. He is evidently impotent and feels the need to vent his frustration on the rest of the world.

How am I doing so far?

[bushrocks1]

Would I send my son to this war? You might ask would I send him to World War 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. To a hypothetical, I can answer, 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 that 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. Now those traitors have apparently occupied the high ground. Yet... we're still in Iraq. Why?...I'm waiting.

[tinker3478]

All it means is that he supported James II, the Catholic English king who was executed for taking away the freedom of the people and breaking the laws of the land. Somehow, that seems very apropo to this nut.

[frankly6]

If you find the posting and re-posting of the same message by Bushrocks1 pointless and counterproductive, just click on "report this comment" below his post and report it.

[lestb35]

The "past life as a Jobite" part, I don't really get. I looked it up but it was too lengthy about British Scottish royalty. is it slang or common for something.

[aeasus]

If someone is portraying a bad code of conduct,aren't you just as bad for bashing them for it.

Just use the system and report it please.

[arthurcl1]

Push Push in the BUSH!

[arthurcl1]

Bushrocks1 is a BUSH LOVER! Go to the bushes in the trees and make love!