Bush looking to reach “truce” with Dems on Iraq
posted at 3:46 pm on June 25, 2007 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
Both sides have an incentive to make a deal before the next big spending fight, although much more urgently in Bush’s case, of course. He’ll have no support left among his base if the amnesty bill passes (as House Republicans have already warned him) and the Dems don’t want to be stuck if Petraeus comes back in September with a favorable progress report. The question is, what would a compromise look like? Like this, maybe:
The White House has opposed proposals in Congress to partition Iraq, or sharply decentralize its government.
That idea — what proponents of decentralization call a “federal system of government” — is favored by an unusually broad bipartisan group of senators. They were pulled together this month by Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), a presidential candidate, to cosponsor a nonbinding resolution supporting the federalism plan.
The administration stance may be easing. On a trip to Iraq about a week ago, Gates openly reflected that greater emphasis outside Baghdad might prove more effective. “Perhaps we have gotten too focused on the central government, and not enough on the provinces and on the tribes and what is happening in those areas,” Gates told reporters.
Bush and Gates have been talking up Baker-Hamilton lately too, so presumably this “decentralization” plan would go hand in hand with a partial withdrawal and redefinition of the mission towards training and focusing on Al Qaeda. On the latter point, Iraq vet Pete Hegseth wonders (as I did the other day) why the Democrats “[seem] to believe that America will have success fighting terrorists in Iraq with a minimal troop presence, despite the fact that 150,000 troops have their hands full right now doing precisely that.” That’s where the decentralization comes in, I guess — empowering local tribesmen, a la the Anbar Awakening, fill the manpower shortfall rather than relying on the Iraqi Army, which can’t even hold the territory being won by U.S. troops in Baquba. What this really is, it seems, is a way to provide enough short-term security to allow us to withdraw with the expectation that the now-decentralized country will eventually fracture and various permutations of civil war will erupt between the partitioned areas and/or within them, among the various tribes and militias. It’s not a real solution, in other words, it’s more a matter of buying time and political cover. But since we don’t have enough troops to guarantee security and aren’t ever going to without a draft, there’s no alternative. Says Susan Collins of the decentralization plan:
“It’s essentially giving federal approval to ethnic cleansing,” Collins said. “On the other hand, nothing seems to be working.”
Pretty much, especially since decentralization is apt to make Turkey nervous about an increasingly autonomous Kurdistan and bring them into this too. Meanwhile, Michael Yon is still in Baquba and seems demoralized by the reports of AQ leaders escpaing and the performance of the pathetic Iraqi police but encouraged by the performance of the local IA divisions and the fact that some AQ leaders are reported to have been trapped by the tightening security cordon. Let’s hope; there was a tight security cordon in Baghdad today too and that didn’t stop a jihadi bomber from killing two high-profile politicians meeting in the lobby of a hotel. Presented without comment:
“It was a great breach of security because there are three checkpoints, one outside and two inside,” said hotel worker Saif al-Rubaie, 28, who witnessed the blast and said all the casualties were Iraqis, most employees in the reception area.
Police said the dead included hotel resident Fassal al-Guood, a Ramadi tribal sheik and former governor of Anbar province who was a leader of the Anbar Salvation Council, which has partnered with U.S. and Iraqi officials to fight al Qaeda influence in Anbar…
Logan reported that the sheiks were meeting Monday in the lobby with officials from the Iraqi Ministry of Defense, including Aziz al-Yasiri, a former general and prominent politician who was leading a movement inside the Iraqi government to force Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki out of office.
Al-Yasiri was also killed in the blast.
In a story first broadcast by CBS News … on Friday, al-Yasiri, a Sunni, said the al-Maliki government had become a “multi-party dictatorship”, and that he was working with other politicians to bring about a no-confidence vote on the prime minister, which could have led to his mandatory resignation.
Finally, Meryl Yourish notes the birth of a meme in coverage of today’s bombings around Iraq.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Truce with the Democrats. War with his base.
amerpundit on June 25, 2007 at 3:51 PM
Anything Susan Collins is involved with is a disaster waiting to happen. Why am I getting images of people climbing over embassy fences and choppers getting shoved off carrier decks?
Hening on June 25, 2007 at 3:51 PM
If “the man” would truly LEAD - others would follow.
GW has lost his sense of leadership - and it’s very very hard to witness.
Jake-the-Goose
jake-the-goose on June 25, 2007 at 3:52 PM
I just thought of something totally, completely insane, but I’ll air it anyway.
What if we had someone threaten to bring impeachment on Bush if amnesty didn’t disappear? The Nutroots are so rabid, they’d likely immediately take the bait. If nothing else it might cause a real distracting sh!tstorm.
Bad Candy on June 25, 2007 at 3:55 PM
Obviously they wouldn’t say it openly that amnesty was the reason, but it would be obvious.
Bad Candy on June 25, 2007 at 3:57 PM
Time for a new commander in chief. This is so, so depressing. I can’t figure out why W has chosen to have his spine removed, but I know our Islamist enemies are rejoicing because of it. The Bush Doctrine RIP.
Halley on June 25, 2007 at 4:03 PM
A deal with Biden and the rest of his ilk in the Democratic party will signal that the assimmilation is complete. The President will be a man without support anywhere. The libs will never accept him. If he brought all the troops home by 5:00 pm today, they would complain that it took too long and that he must have some other nefarious plan in the works. If he punts Iraq, the remnants of his base will cut him loose.
Maybe eight years is too long for someone to stand the rigors of office. How about one term, six years long?
Mallard T. Drake on June 25, 2007 at 4:04 PM
Except you’d have to get the Senate to vote for it. You need 60 votes.
amerpundit on June 25, 2007 at 4:05 PM
WTF happened to GW? Has he always been like this and nobody noticed til now because of 9/11 and the war and all that?
Oy vey.
Mindcrime on June 25, 2007 at 4:08 PM
What strikes me about this is he is bending over backwards to appease the party that strongarmed him for years. I guess he wants to go out on a high note. I just wish he would go away. He’s changed.
madmonkphotog on June 25, 2007 at 4:10 PM
Well I think the Republicans should’ve given the nomination to someone else back in 2004. Although it would’ve been an unusual thing, perhaps without precedent, I think allowing Bush to simply have the nomination just cuz he was there was a mistake. Maybe McCain or someone else wouldn’t have done any better, but it’s hard to see how they could have possibly done much worse.
apollyonbob on June 25, 2007 at 4:12 PM
Mindcrime:
Has Jorge Boosh always been like this, you ask? Wasnt he elected and didnt he run the early War on Terror as a staunch conservative, responsive to his base?
Alas, you are probably right that because of 9-11 we didnt notice that Jorge was not really one of us all along.
There was the partnership with Teddy K. on No Child Left Behind; prescription drugs; signing McCain Feingold; never vetoing one of the huge spending increases from Congress;
then it started to get ugly with the base with the Harriet Miers nomination where it became normal for the white house to brand opponents as sexist and bigoted.
And all along, the whole time, Jorge was making noises about amnesty for illegals. But we were too focused on keeping JF Kerry out of the White House to pay much heed.
Alas,now Boosh wants to sell out his entire base and is more interested in kissing Teddy’s and Harry’s buttocks than listening to whoever is left with any guts on the right.
Oy vey in spades, my friend.
Always Right on June 25, 2007 at 4:15 PM
I thought that Bush was supposed to be strong on terror. I have spent years defending him and the GWOT to my more “enlightend” lefty friends but lately its been a little hard. First, there was this crap amnesty bill that will make the situation worse and now he beginning to capitulating over Iraq, and giving cash to buy guns to Fatah. Whats next, putting maps to skyscrappers in all the cockpits of 747’s?
mundayr on June 25, 2007 at 4:19 PM
You don’t offer up compromises, or hint at them to get a reaction, if you have confidence in your position. Without some (highly unlikely) Pearl Harbor event this administration is tucking in it’s tail and starting to write memoirs. Also, with talk like this, it is obvious that the administration believes that Israel will not act on it’s own. Dark times ahead.
Limerick on June 25, 2007 at 4:20 PM
On Iraq, Unless they are wearing a uniform, I don’t trust ANY of them, (including the President, anymore). I especially don’t trust Gates.
Maybe I’m wrong about it; I hope so, but I have a feeling that President Bush would be glad to trade selling out the military and the decent Iraqis if he could get his illegal alien amnesty passed.
LegendHasIt on June 25, 2007 at 4:22 PM
Can’t they start it on the House?
Even still, they have to be able to find one moonbat who would put it up. Combined with the pressure of the Nutroots, and a few GOPer who knew the game being played…
Bad Candy on June 25, 2007 at 4:24 PM
Have there been any studies on this?
bnelson44 on June 25, 2007 at 4:27 PM
I never thought that I would see this kind of thing happen. George W is badly kidding himself if he thinks that he will gain any peace with the Democrats if he compromises with them. All that George W will do is to jeopardize the support for he roops that they deserve and to alienate completely what had been a base of support of those who appreciated George W’s vigorous prosecution of the war with the radical jihadists. Now, for the sake of the troops, I am looking forward to the 2008 election so that we can elect someone who will be strong as well as defeat Hillary.
Phil Byler on June 25, 2007 at 4:28 PM
And it will be portrayed in the media as a backlash against the war. Bush got elected partly on the strength of the public disgust with a president diddling around with an intern in the oval office.
An impeachment at this point will only serve as a warning to future presidents that the same fate will befall them if they dare to start a war. Phooey.
Nichevo on June 25, 2007 at 4:35 PM
Truce with the Dems over Iraq is like peace in the Middle East! Lame duck indeed. There are no leaders left in Washington!
synycalwon on June 25, 2007 at 4:38 PM
I keep seeing this mentioned on righty blogs, however lets just keep in mind that Reagan funded Afghans against the Soviets, Saddam against Iran…..I don’t see how this is that much different? The reality is Iran/Syria are funding Hamas and they will win if some other side doesnt fund Fatah, lesser of evils and fighting our ultimate enemy in Iran is what I think is going on here…
jp on June 25, 2007 at 4:41 PM
Not enough troops to start with, so it’s been a long, slow dumb, wasteful strategy all along.
As Teddy Rossevelt said: “Best not to hit an opponent if you can avoid it, but it you must hit, never hit softly.”
Shock ‘n Awe becomes Shuck ‘n Jive.
A fool’s rules of engagement, a dimwit’s understanding of resurgent imperialistic Islam, a moron’s grasp of the sectarian schism within Islam since 650 A.D.
And what the f**k ever happened to Bin Laden?
profitsbeard on June 25, 2007 at 4:41 PM
This is NOT the George Bush I voted for twice.
Is he shooting for a ~zero~ percent approval rating? Just WTF is going on there in DC, anyway?
I think it’s time to break out the pitchforks - we need to replace the whole stinking lot of ‘em. Staffers, elected officials, bureaucrats, everything.
Even the furniture…
jdawg on June 25, 2007 at 4:45 PM
Sell.Out.
ophelia on June 25, 2007 at 4:47 PM
When the Dems’ say “change our current strategy” they really mean “cut, run, then blame whatever happens next on the Bush administration’s mishandling of our foreign policy”.
Blah blah blah. Compromising with the Dems is just the same as making a deal with the terrorists.
Its Tommy on June 25, 2007 at 4:53 PM
BUSH SURRENDER, Sept. 16, 2001 (Islamic Center, DC)
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all very much for your hospitality. We’ve just had a — wide-ranging discussions on the matter at hand. Like the good folks standing with me, the American people were appalled and outraged at last Tuesday’s attacks. And so were Muslims all across the world. Both Americans and Muslim friends and citizens, tax-paying citizens, and Muslims in nations were just appalled and could not believe what we saw on our TV screens.
These acts of violence against innocents violate the fundamental tenets of the Islamic faith. And it’s important for my fellow Americans to understand that.
MB4 on June 25, 2007 at 5:12 PM
There can be no “truce” with Socialists. I’m sick of all of the politically correct semantics. The Democratic leadership in Congress is a Socialist leadership, and it reflects the overwhelming majority of the Democratic Party base. Seeking a “truce” with them is just another way of saying that you are going to appease them. And there can be no appeasement with a Party that wants the destruction of our country. You either stand against them, or you submit. Republican submission to the Socialists has led to a conservative abandonment of the Party. And I fear for this country.
OhEssYouCowboys on June 25, 2007 at 5:36 PM
I finally figured it out. This guy has been willing to bend over and grab his ankles for Democrats for 6 years. He must like it.
400lb Gorilla on June 25, 2007 at 6:09 PM
Benedict Boosh
Wade on June 25, 2007 at 6:36 PM
Seems that Meryl Yourish is an extremely perceptive person. I covered this earlier than she did, but no one reads me….
ScottG on June 25, 2007 at 6:59 PM
I joined & posted a couple of times today. Bit of a background. Live in Mass. Have spent over 6 years defending GWB to a state full of libs. First shamnesty, now this.
I feel like a friend died. What have I been sticking up for? My principles of course. But for this crap?
PowWow on June 25, 2007 at 7:21 PM
WTF happened to GW? Has he always been like this and nobody noticed til now because of 9/11 and the war and all that?
Oy vey.
Mindcrime on June 25, 2007 at 4:08 PM
Yes, he always was like this. I am a naturalized citizen (96) and I have always been amazed at the quality? of the presidential candidates since 92. I must say the new crop for 2008 does not look any better.
SIJ6141 on June 25, 2007 at 8:31 PM
Truce? Why, he won. His conviction on the War is about the only thing he has going for him at this point.
allrightythen on June 25, 2007 at 11:29 PM
That was a despicable headline. No class a$$es.
csdeven on June 25, 2007 at 11:39 PM
And we are getting bent over frontwards, basically assuming “the position.”
smellthecoffee on June 26, 2007 at 12:55 AM