"Cheney Predicts Progress in Iraq Report"

[GreenPartyVoter]

Is it because he leaned on the writers a bit?

http://apnews1.iwon.com/article/20070731/D8QNRTT00.html

WASHINGTON (AP) - Vice President Dick Cheney said Tuesday a pivotal September report on the war in Iraq is likely to show "significant progress" - putting himself ahead of President Bush, who has refused to speculate on what the report will say.

Gen. David Petraeus, the U.S. commander in Iraq, and Ambassador Ryan Crocker are required to report to Congress by Sept. 15 on progress in Iraq. Their evaluation is expected to shape the administration's next move on the war, including decisions on how many U.S. troops will stay in Iraq, and for how long.

"The reports I'm hearing from people whose views I respect indicate that the Petraeus plan is in fact producing results," Cheney told CNN's Larry King in an interview to be telecast Tuesday night. "Now, admittedly, I've been on one side of this argument from the beginning."

The White House has been touting encouraging signs of progress since Bush ordered a troop buildup in Iraq in January. Yet Bush has deferred comment on the upcoming report itself.

[atreides1]

1. I Knew It

The Petraeus Report is already written and he's probably rehearsing with his script right now.

[babylonsister]

6. Yup. That's the deal; he wouldn't hang his hat on anything if he didn't

know the result.

[opiate69]

2. Of course he does... he's probably read it already..

I mean, does anybody really doubt that the big Sept. Report was most likely written a couple of months ago?

[Botany]

3. KInda like the 2 operations that Cheney oversaw ....

.... The Office of Special Plans and another one whose name
escapes me now produced documents that supported the
case for a war in Iraq.

The Sept. report will say ..... THE SURGE NEEDS MORE TIME.

[gratuitous]

4. That's what happens when you've already written the report

Just waiting for it to come back from Mr. Petraeus with his signature.

Which is why the Democrats should be talking right now about what objective measures constitute "progress." Don't let the administration and its military lackeys look at dozens of bombs going off every day while the general population gets an hour or so of electricity a day, the government continues to fracture, the opting out of continued governance by the Sunnis, incursions over the border by the Turks, and the unrestricted flow of arms from other nations (like our good friends the Saudis), and say that looks like progress.

[monmouth]

7. Took the words right off my keyboard....Cheney waiting for that report to print out....

[jmp]

5. Well US deaths are down this past month so ...

It looks like the momentum to end the war will hit a brick wall. Remember to thank Pelosi and Reid for their courageous leadership.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

10. Shouldn't "progress" produce MORE momentum for us to end the war?

If we are making progress then shouldn't that mean that we don't need to keep as many troops in Iraq and that we can start withdrawing/re-deploying troops? Remember, Bush said that "as they stand up, we will stand down" (or something to that effect). The problem that I have with this whole situation is that, regardless of whatever "progress" is made on the security front, it is ultimately IMHO irrelevant without the political progress that we were told more US troops would be necessary to support. However, the erstwhile leaders of the Iraqi government seem to be treating themselves to a month-long vacation (not hard to tell who their inspiration is in terms of taking long vacations while ignoring crucial job responsibilities) in other (presumably cooler) countries, which begs the question of why we should be putting MORE troops at risk and spending MORE of our tax dollars to help prop up a government that does not appear to be taking their job responsibilities seriously (which could just as easily apply to our current mis-administration). To me, personally, I don't feel that we should be in Iraq in the first place and everything that has transpired since Bush invaded Iraq has only served to vindicate my convictions, as well as those of everybody who initially opposed the invasion/occupation, so whatever "progress" or "success" in Iraq that is made at this point is utterly meaningless to me and has come at FAR TOO HIGH A PRICE in terms of the money that we've spent, the lives lost (both Iraqi and American), the loss of our international credibility, and the disruption that our needless and unnecessary invasion/occupation of Iraq has caused our efforts to crush Al-Queda as evidenced by their apparent rejuvenation. The plug needs to be pulled on our Iraq mis-adventure NOW regardless of what General Patreaus reports back to Congress. If we haven't made the kind of "progress" that should've made in Iraq by now (after having been over there for 4 years now), it's simply not going to happen IMHO.

[jmp]

11. Should it? Sure. But that's not ...

The way this administration works, and Republicans are less likely to peel off if US deaths drop significantly. Pelosi and Reid should have stopped this mess when they had the chance.

[BOSSHOG]

8. Other brilliant conservative republican predictions about Iraq

- we will be greeted as liberators
- Iraq will pay for the war
- "Mission Accomplished"
- Sunnis and Shias will get along
- Hussien has WMD's
- and on and on and on

The republicans were right about one thing they told their lemmings:

Government does not work, put us in charge and we will prove it.

[Tesla]

9. And then the good General will....

Get the Medal of Honor!