Well, I have not begun the new year well on technical completeness. Here is the TIME archive article to which I referred but failed to include the link in my original post. July 14, 1971: That Other Presidential Election http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,909870,00.html <http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,909870,00.html>
Isnt it interesting that the BBC published an interview today with Iraqs PM Maliki in which Maliki says he longs to leave his job? 100307 PM Maliki tells BBC he does not want another term in office http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6226953.stm <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6226953.stm> One wonders how much Malikis decision has to do with Bushs One Last Desperate Effort for Victory. Reports are that the Decider committed to the troop escalation in early December and his war cabinet has been scurrying around looking for justifications to present to the voters in what I anticipate is an Alamo speech. As Pres. Bush lauded Pres. Fords dutiful service as a Navy veteran, saying that the young Ford had sought to get on the first ship into combat, I could not help but compare the 43rd presidents efforts to avoid combat in Vietnam and his months of AWOL as a Texas National Guard pilot. One has to wonder if soldiers and their families will not have similar thoughts as The Decider makes a call for sacrifice next week. Let us review this from the latest Military Times poll: Only 35% of military members surveyed approve the way Pres. Bush is handling the war in Iraq, down from a peak of 63% in 2004, while 42% say they disapprove. The 2006 Military Times Poll released last week also found that half of those surveyed say additional troops are needed in Iraq, while 13% say all troops should leave. About 1 in 5 service members say large numbers of US troops can be replaced by Iraqi forces within 2 years. More than one-third say it will take at least 5 years. Only 41% believe the US should have gone to war in Iraq in the first place. http://www.militarycity.com/polls/2006_main.php <http://www.militarycity.com/polls/2006_main.php> And just in case you missed this: Just weeks ago, CentCom commander Gen. John Abizaid told Congress I met with every divisional commander, General Casey, the core commander, General Dempsey, we all talked together. And I said, in your professional opinion, if we were to bring in more American Troops now, does it add considerably to our ability to achieve success in Iraq? And they all said no <http://thinkprogress.org/2006/11/15/abizaid-mccain-iraq/> . (Think Progress 010307) NBC News Pentagon reporter Jim Miklaszewski reported last night that the new strategy, to be announced next Tuesday, and an administration official admitted to us today that this surge option is more of a political decision than a military one. >From the Transcript: Administration officials told us today that President Bush has now all but decided to surge those additional troops into Baghdad to try to control over the violence there and only then could they accelerate the turnover of territory to Iraqi security forces. Fact is theyre not up to the task yet. The plan would also throw more U.S. money at Iraq for reconstruction and a jobs program. Interestingly enough, one administration official admitted to us today that this surge option is more of a political decision than a military one because the American people have run out of patience and President Bush is running out of time to achieve some kind of success in Iraq. While this plan will clearly draw some stiff opposition on Capitol Hill, the president is expected to announce it a week from today.
_______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
