I am skeptical of this, as it comes from the NYT:
"WASHINGTON, Jan. 18 - The Iraqi government that emerges from elections on Jan. 30 will almost certainly ask the United States to set a specific timetable for withdrawing its troops, according to new American intelligence estimates described by senior administration officials."
I am in favor of a timetable for withdrawl. Thus far, we have set specific goals for the progress in Iraq. This has kept us constantly working towards a mark. This has enabled us to say focused and measure our accjmplishments. Once the elections are completed, we should establish a gradual withdrawl plan, based on the training of Iraqi troops. Trained Iraqi soldiers would replace American troops. I don't believe this withdrawl should take place within the next couple of years, but we should show the Iraqi's that we have a definite plan for leaving their country.
The NYT surprinsingly makes some editorial distortions:
In recent days, Mr. Powell and others among Mr. Bush's senior advisers have become more direct in acknowledging that the anti-American insurgency is not likely to fade soon.
How is this an "anti-American" insurgency? As of late, exponentially more Iraqis have been targeted and killed than have Americans. The insurgents are attempting to disrupt the democratic process, not drive out the Americans. However, since the NYT wants the US out of Iraq, they have to alter the news to fit their agenda.
No comments:
Post a Comment