Two of the talking points from Harry Reid's office:
1) Transitions the U.S. mission away from policing a civil war to training
and equipping Iraqi security forces, protecting U.S. forces and conducting
targeted counter-terror operations.
2) Begins the phased redeployment of our troops no later than October 1,
2007 with a goal of removing all combat forces by April 1, 2008, except for
those carrying out security, training and counter-terror operations.
There's more but I thought these two the most salient.
1) The operative word here is "transition." Just exchange the word(s) counter-terror for counter-insurgency and you have US involvement for the in-definate future. This is not a withdrawal of US troops. Is the Bush policy not involved in "targeting counter-terror" groups?
2)"Re-deployment" of troops here, not withdrawal. Once again the sheep in wolves clothing. Lots of "except" (ions) also.
1 comment:
I'm not sure what you're saying, but I think I might agree in part.
The language is vague and muddy of course. But I think what the Dems are trying to do is withdraw while still talking tough, while the Bush admin. is just talking tough with no real plan for leaving.
Reid's "The war is lost" comments, even though he has tried to finesse them, are the most honest thing from a politician I've heard lately. I think they speak louder about his mindset than the cautious policy statements that the DNC trots out.
ifs
Post a Comment