Bush now looking back to Iraq Study Group for help

[dajoki]

Second Life for Study Group
Iraq Woes Lead To a Reappraisal

By Michael Abramowitz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, May 21, 2007; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/20/AR2007052001406.html?referrer=email&referrer=email&referrer=email&referrer=email

After an initially tepid reception from policymakers, the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group are getting a second look from the White House and Congress, as officials continue to scour for bipartisan solutions to salvage the American engagement in Iraq.

With negotiations continuing this week on a new war funding bill, the administration is strongly signaling that it would accept the idea of requiring the Iraqi government to meet political benchmarks or else risk losing some assistance from the United States. That was one of the key proposals from the group headed by former secretary of state James A. Baker III and former Indiana congressman Lee H. Hamilton, but it was initially dismissed by the White House when first proposed last December.

<<snip>>

The comeback of the Iraq Study Group's suggestions underscores the intense desire by some in Washington to fashion a workable long-term policy on Iraq. The months since the commission issued its report have seen increased polarization, with Democrats mostly united in their desire to end American involvement in the war and President Bush struggling to buy time for additional troops to pacify Baghdad.

The urgency may be felt most acutely on Capitol Hill, where lawmakers from both parties are planning to introduce legislation soon that would make the 79 Iraq Study Group recommendations official policy of the U.S. government. Among the sponsors are several Republicans who have traditionally supported the Bush administration on Iraq -- another sign of how GOP lawmakers may be looking for an exit strategy.

<<snip>>

Officials in Washington "don't know what to do," said Hamilton, a Democrat. "They don't have a framework. They are looking. They are searching. Something has to follow the surge -- they are interested in our proposals as a framework for policy."

[frogcycle]

1. a freaking YEAR later they MIGHT look at it...

it was commissioned MArch 15, 2006. The report was issued Dec 6, 2006. Nine months of study and reporting.

Rejected out of hand, supposedly in lieu of a 3-month "surge," but that after 3-4 months of dithering, suppposedly reviewing the ISG report along with discussiong with generals, blah blah blah.

So the "3-month surge" now is supposed to go until September - then they'll spend a few months evaluating whether it "worked" and lo and behold here it is Dec 6, 2007

and they are going to maybe take a look at it as a post-surge option.

A year's worth of death. roughly a thousand US KIA, some 6-7 times that maimed, yet more seriously injured by can recover.

And then there's the Iraqi casualties, which we cannot even guess at.


Is there punishment in this universe adequate to levy on these people?

[Benhurst]

2. No, there isn't punishment in this universe adequate to levy on these

people; but a war crimes trial at the Hague would be a good start.