WASHINGTON, May 22, 2007
Administration Working On Plan B For Iraq
Exclusive: With War Support, Army Wearing Thin, Goverment Calculates Iraq Pullout Costs And Timeframe
-
Play CBS Video Video 'Plan B' For Iraq? CBS News has learned that the Bush administration and the Pentagon have started planning for what happens if the current troop surge fails. David Martin reports.
-
-
(CBS/AP)
-
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates testifies at the House Appropriations' Defense Subcommittee in March. (AP Photo)
-
Daniel Serwer, the former director of the Iraq Study Group, says a complete U.S. withdrawal would doom the Iraqi government. (CBS)
-
-
Photo Essay Iraq In Pictures A daily diary with scenes of the latest attacks and snapshots from the effort to rebuild a nation.
-
Interactive Iraq: 4 Years Later The conflict wears on as the nation struggles to rebuild.
-
Interactive American Heroes Profiles of U.S. soldiers who've died in Iraq, a look at the war's toll and pictures of mourning.
Despite the almost daily car bombings — today's killed 25 — commanders in the field report modest progress. But they have also concluded the Iraqi government will not meet any of the benchmarks for political reconciliation among its warring factions, CBS News national security correspondent David Martin reports in a CBS News exclusive.
As Adm. William Fallon, the overall commander for the Middle East, put it, "reconciliation isn't likely in the time we have available."
Right now, Plan B is nothing more than ideas about how the United States could change course in Iraq. But it is a recognition that both political support and the Army are wearing out.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates hopes to start withdrawing by the end of the year. A complete pullout of troops and equipment would take an estimated 10 months, but would probably trigger the collapse of the Iraqi government.
"I don't think there's the real option to withdraw completely, because it's quite clear the Iraqi government wouldn't survive complete withdrawal," said Daniel Serwer, the former director of the Iraq Study Group.
Just six months ago, the group recommended pulling all combat troops out in 2008. But he says that it no longer possible.
"You're talking about staying from five to 10 more years," he said. "You're not talking about staying a few more months."
At current levels?
"Maybe with some drawdown, but at close to current levels," Serwer said.
Plan B, as it is known, is not an official document. Commanders in the field believe the surge will have to continue into next year, but that military advice is on a collision course with political reality.
© MMVII, CBS Interactive, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
More From CBS Evening News
Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie."
- 1
- 2
- 3
- next
See all 59 CommentsWhat color is the sky on your planet? Do others there imagine an Al-Qaeda/Iran connection? Even Orally and the crew at fox noise aren't that stupid. Al-Qaeda is almost exclusively Sunni. In case you've missed it, two of the groups involved in Iraq's civil war, brought to you by bushshit for brains, are the Sunni and the Shia. They've been enemies for ages. It took a tyrant like Saddam to control their bloodlust. His inclusion of the minority Sunni in his government is another reason the majority Shia are so pissed. Iran is a Shia nation and is more likely to ally with the Vatican to restart the Crusades than deal with Al-Qaeda, much less finance them.
If you are determined to seem ignorant, you can save some effort and talk about the WMD's that we're going to find any day, now. You could even talk about the notarized contract among Saddam and Bin Laden for 9/11 that tricky dicky the second found in Iraq with the receipt for the uranium from Niger.
We wouldn't be in this mess IF:
The CIA didn't overthrow democratically elected Mossadegh in 1953 to install the brutal Shah of Iran (which led to the isalmic fundamentalist revolution in 1980).
The US government didn't pump billions into Egypt to support dictator Mubarak
The US didn't spend billions each year on Israel, ignoring the plight of the Palestinians. Still not peace after so many decades.
The US didn't help our friend Saddam rise to power and back him in the 1980s War with Iran
The US didn't prop up the Royal Saudi dictatorship, and move out troops onto their holy land in Gulf War I.
The US didn't impose murderous sanctions on the Iraqi people throughout the 1990s.
The US didn't collude with the dictators to take their Oil on the cheap.
The US didn't LIE about WMDs and Al Qaeda links in order to INVADE and OCCUPY their land.
The US didn't whisk people off to Abu Gharib to be tortured.
The US didn;t bomb Bhagdad and Falluja into ruins.
The US troops didn't have bad apple soldiers that kill civilians at check points or rape and kill innocent civilians.
.....
Republican Ron Paul was right! The terrorists Don't Hate "our freedom", they hate what we have done and continue to do in THEIR lands.
-Let the Generals stop all drawing for plan B.
ChirpingRick is gonna double effort in going to church and kneeling on muddy roads and simulate the via-dolorosa twice a day, in his backyard.
-arse008 will not blog on Shabbat anymore, and you guys you won't have to draw a Plan B, less a plan C. Let's have a glass of wine and celebrate the scam-victory of Haliburton, and the Enron and other tied-ties-CEO's corporations a la ******** Cheney's...
-Badaxmothrffo... will enlist and bring an UZI gun that he can throw in the Euphrates river after killing the little girls in Bagdad. He will feel pity by times (when he's not drunk) and pay a big $200 by body he causes to bleed on the streets of Baghdad...
Impeach the chimp, and his co-presicent.
Posted by jn122736 at 11:20 AM : May 23, 2007
Also as a result of marching lock-step the neoconservative wing of the republican party was able to take control by a combination of appealing to party loyalty above all else (much as the communists of the 20's and 30's did in the Soviet Union) and fear of the party's power once it gained strength (again like the Soviet Communists, except this time in the 50's - 70's). Of course this meant the nearly complete crushing of the real republicans, the traditional conservatives, who have seen their party hi-jacked right out from underneath them over the past 20 years or so (starting with Reagan and his self-named "11th Commandment" of never speaking ill of a fellow republican). Traditional republicans like Goldwater, Ford, and even Nixon would be appalled at what the republican party has devolved into.
WMD, why nobody never ask the question, "what happen to them?"
We know how we got there, the question is how can we get out with our honor intact. Once we leave we bring the war home.
The war will began in the streets of the USA.
Bush did not draw first blood.
In partial defense of those who voted for the Iraq invasion:
There were many democrats AND republicans who would have voted differently on the Iraq invasion if they had had access to ALL the information that the administration had, instead of the cooked/doctored variety they were given.
This, while not acceptable from those in such critically important positions, is all too human. The natural anger and frustration of Americans (including congress) over 911 were utilized to the fullest by the Bush administration.
My problem at this time is in understanding why Congress feels it must give in on the funding question. They sent Bush a bill with full funding and he CHOSE not to fund the troops by vetoing the bill. If he refused to bring the troops home before they are imperiled by the lack of funds then he could be immediately removed from office (malicious endangerment) just as if he had murdered someone with a handgun.
--------------
edjohn66,%u2026.With respect to your independent comment, I disagree with your contention that,
%u201CThe whole purpose of having an opposition party is that it will OPPOSE what the government does%u201D.
I would change the word OPPOSE to read QUESTION.
I think both parties are too inclined to oppose any legislation simply because it comes from the other side, and not necessarily because it is good or bad per se.
The Republican Party, starting with the infamous %u201Ccontract with America%u201D, has been in almost total lock-step in recent years and with them being in FULL control of our government throughout this administration, their refusal to oversee their own party has lead to the worst/most corruption I have seen in my life, not to mention the present Iraq fiasco.
Continued:
Bush and his policies are an absolute failure.
He's easily the worst President in our history.
Posted by micma at 09:57 AM : May 23, 2007
And the really sick part is that he'll probably get away with it. Bush knows this war is lost and has known it for quite some time. Still he intends to drag it out until after 2008 so that when the inevitable pull out happens, he can sit on his fat lying as*s at his phony movie set Texas "ranch" and say something along the lines of, "Well if the new president has just stayed the course like I did then we'd have had a victory in Iraq, so don't blame me!". Of course at the current rate our troops are dying that'll mean at the very least we'll lose another 1000 soldiers just to cover his as*s, but hey that's a price Bush is willing to pay for his ego. After all it's not like he ever really gave a da*mn about our troops lives in the first place.
Posted by mudrose at 10:29 AM : May 23, 2007
Hey Mud - we aren't doing too good today i see ........ You could have at least tried to give an educated response rather than trying to change the subject - i know you're much better than this lame reply ..........
Posted by parrot2 at 10:44 AM : May 23, 2007
Nope, actually he's not.
Gee, ya think????
The truth is FINALLY sinking in and still Bush wants more and more money, with no strings attached. He must be the absolutely dumbest man in the entire history of US politics.
Plan A was to walk on the flowers the Iraqis threw to greet us as liberators.
Plan B was to protect the oil and let the Iraqis sort out their own problems.
Plan C was to build an Iraqi army - that fell apart.
And so on...
Oh - now it's the fault of the 110th Congress? Get a life!! They've been in power since January, and President Ding Dong has threatened to veto every piece of legislation they've come up with. How about the fact that for the first 6 years of his administration, the Republicans in Congress let him do whatever he wanted, whenever he wanted to? Though I guess it's hard to do anything when you only work 2 days a week for 12 years!!
Posted by hungry1968
That's what I like about you defeatists. Always putting your literal minds out front. Hey, did ya hear Iran is building momentum to finance Al-Qaeda big time to stimulate the 110th to get out of Iraq. And, of course, they will collude.
Oh - now it's the fault of the 110th Congress? Get a life!! They've been in power since January, and President Ding Dong has threatened to veto every piece of legislation they've come up with. How about the fact that for the first 6 years of his administration, the Republicans in Congress let him do whatever he wanted, whenever he wanted to? Though I guess it's hard to do anything when you only work 2 days a week for 12 years!!
b = blame
bushit will blame the Bushit War in Iraq on Congress for believing his outragious lies about WMD, Al-Qaeda, etc.
then he'll say he's protected America and then he'll get his dumb azzz out of our WH.
there has never been such a dangerous born-again
ex-alcoholic, draft-dodger, lightweight.....and on and on and on
Bush and his policies are an absolute failure.
He's easily the worst President in our history.
Posted by micma
You can thank the 110th Congress for this.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- next
See all 59 Comments