...and into Afghanistan.

We're getting out...in three years.

How many young men and women will pay dearly for the delay?

You guys are a tough crowd.....

Oh, come on. What on earth makes you think this "agreement" will have any bearing on what actually happens?

It hurts us... now that Iraq is essentially off the table, it takes away a significant amount of appeal for Obama... Since the perception is that war is going to end regardless of who is president, McCain gets a boost from anti-war conservative independents.

Clever manipulation on Rove's part...

Does this mean the US will have no troops left in Iraq, save for a few advisors and trainers? What about the 18 or so permanent bases built in Iraq?

Why would anyone believe a word these people say?

I think we all know that even under the best circumstances we'll end up with some "residual forces" in Iraq. Even Obama has agreed to that. Still, this is good news since it commits us to getting most of our troops out, and it puts Republicans on the record as supporting a withdrawal. That's worth a lot.

Still, this is good news since it commits us to getting most of our troops out, and it puts Republicans on the record as supporting a withdrawal. That's worth a lot.

I don't know. To me it's only worth a lot if there's some mechanism to hold them accountable for honoring that commitment. If three years hence they can go back on their word, as they've broken the public trust on so many other issues, and expect that they can lie their way back to office, then "commitments" aren't worth much.

No permanent bases. Now who's a complete putz?

Here's a search string for those who are in the mood for a little laugh:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=site%3Awashingtonmonthly.com+%22permanent+bases%22&btnG=Google+Search

Obama gave the Iraqis the leverage to force Bush and Petraeus to negotiate. Simple as that.

There's many a slip between cup and lip. No way of knowing now what will happen. It could all blow up again without warning.

Have any of you guys given any thought to celebrating that we are winning the war and helping the future safety of America and the world, rather than celebrating we are going to get out?

Obama still may win (although it is looking less likely every day), but I always wondered how a politician could be elected president when he would never say that he wanted to win the war, only that he wanted to end the war. It seems like if the other guy said he wanted to win, and now it appears that we are about to win (or have won), the other guy then is likely to win the election. We'll see.

By the way, there is a devastating historical audio out of Obama coldly explaining his opposition to the Born Alive Infant Protection Act based on the need to call in a second doctor on an emergency basis. For those who like Obama (I assume most of you), it is the type of thing that will move votes against him. The You Tube video also includes his lousy "above my pay grade" answer about when life begins.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypDwNpgIUQc

Any chance he will be dumped for Hillary?

Probably not, but I have always thought he would pick Hillary for VP if he was in trouble by the convention and I think he likely considers himself in trouble.

Obama pressed the issue from one side and the Iraqis from the other. Take Iraq off the table and we can concentrate on the real McCain. He's even crazier than Bush.

One additional thing about that tape. It obviously is only a snippet of what Obama said and, as chilling as it is, he is a smart pol who no doubt said some more human stuff at some other point in his speech. So the effect will be mitigated to whatever else he said, but the snippet still will hurt him and, of course, anything that keeps this almost inconceivable past vote by Obama in the news will be bad for him.

You guys are a tough crowd..... Posted by: Kevin Drum on August 21, 2008 at 12:13 AM |

I'm not trying to be a cynic. But it's inevitable. Some unknown number of American men and women will die in Iraq before 2011 rolls around.

What will the cost of their lives buy us?

i've often pointed out to the younger people that there was a national consensus to get out of vietnam in 1968, and low and behold, in 1975 we were finally out.

the national consensus on iraq was reached by 2006, so largely out by 2011 is pretty fast.

now, in a better world, of course, that would be slow, but in a better world, the likes of brian wouldn't be voters. no, brian, i haven't even spent a second contemplating how the US "won" the war, because we haven't and never were able to since there was nothing to "win;" i ahven't spent a second on how this war helped the future "safety" of america because, in fact, it has weakened the US in a whole variety of ways and made us more vulnerable; and i haven't spent a second on how the world is "safer" because life is too short to spend any of it thinking the kind of idiot drivel that you type away every time i dip into comments.

we won't even dignify the unbearable stupidity of your remarks on obama and infants other than to note how unimaginably slimy the right wing is....

Wow, the Neocons admit defeat, or as close as they can ever come to it. I never thought it would happen. Do we have Ms. Rice to thank for this?

This is good news, no question. And bigger than the political questions, which are:

Why is a timetable for withdrawal suddenly OK, when it was supposed to be a threat to the troops previously?

Did the Republican Party, facing the facts of national displeasure with the war (occupation, really) simply convince Bush to agree to this in advance of the election?

With an "official" end of the war in sight, will Obama's poll numbers drop like the Dow-Jones average?

Will George Bush and John McCain appear together in flight suits under a "Mission Finally Accomplished" banner sometime soon?

Is August too early to roll out another "new product?"

Why should the "neocons" admit defeat when we have won ?

Have any of you guys given any thought to celebrating that we are winning the war and helping the future safety of America and the world, rather than celebrating we are going to get out?

Maybe you missed 2003 when us guys expressed the thought that starting an unwinnable war that hurts America's safety is not a good idea, but more likely it's just that your understanding of history doesn't stretch back that far whether you lived through it or not.

I am very happy that Bush seems to have stopped digging and has a plan to climb out of the hole. Too bad about all the bodies that he'll leave in the bottom of it.

You guys are a tough crowd.....

It's got to be deflating when you're excited.

I think the Bush years have made me very wary of anything until it actually happens. It's like being glad the runaway truck might be stopped from crashing through traffic, but you look back at the wreckage and you just feel ...lost and heart-broken.

Bush and McCain will say their way worked. They'll still say things like this, from Saint John:

"He has made these decisions not because he doesn't love America but because he doesn't think it matters whether American wins or loses."

Maybe I can get more excited another day. Right now, it scares me to death that McCain might Swift Boat his way into the WH and God knows what will happen with Iraq or Iran or Russia then .

Any word about reparations? I mean, surely we owe a wee bit on that front for launching a war that's killed off over a million, wounded/injured god-knows-how-many, sent nearly 5 million fleeing from their homes, and plunged nearly every measurable index on human welfare into the toilet.

Oh, but wait: the "surge" was a fantastic success. Nevermind then.

Why should the "neocons" admit defeat when we have won ?

Mike, I certainly don't expect you to admit it out loud, but actions speak louder than words.

You can't find WMDs that don't exist,
You can't undo the ethnic cleansing,
You can't unfight the civil war,

What you can do is oust the Iranian backed government and install a permanent military presence, but that goal is slipping away.

At least you'll always have the treasury raping!

Boronx

You declare the war "unwinnable" in 2003 and that is the end of the story?

There are fair questions about whether the cost was worth it, and certainly the loss of each life was a tragedy, but the reality is that Americans and Iraqi Muslems teamed up shoulder to shoulder to pulverize Al Quaeda in Iraq and remove the evil Hussein and his sons from doing any more harm. How much more evil would they have perpetrated if left in power? If Iraq continues to stabilize, how much benefit will that bring rather than the continued reign of Hussein and his sons?

I think you need to look at the full story, rather than declaring your 2003 view as the end of the story.

Where's the money?

$547,132,266,207 as of a couple of minutes ago.

http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home

Nobody in this administration should be thinking of going anywhere, especially with any ill-gotten gains, but directly to congressional hearings and then to prison.

Getting out of Iraq doesn't get McCain out of the woods. The economy still sucks, and people hate Bush for reasons that go well beyond Iraq. I'd go so far as to say that Iraq wasn't even McCain's worst problem.

It is worrisome that McCain has successfully driven up Obama's negatives. We'll see how things look after the conventions, and then the debates. At that point the polling will be more meaningful.

1. what do you folks (brian, che che, etc.) mean by "winning" that war? How do you define further victory. Hussein's gone, there is a soveriegn govt. in place. What exactly are we to gain further from throwing young people's bodies into this hole?

2. by agreeing to withdrawal, the Bush administration has effectively adopted the position of the opposition party. that can't be a good thing for his party's nominee. .

SINCE WHEN DOES ANYONE BELIEVE THIS ADMINISTRATION???

The only "historical outpouring" at Bush's funeral, Cha Chi, will be the children of our needlessly-fallen Iraqi soldiers pissing on his grave.

(BTW, "...and renigged"?? Really - "renigged"? You're truly lower than a snake's basement, scumbag...)

but the reality is that Americans and Iraqi Muslems teamed up shoulder to shoulder to pulverize Al Quaeda in Iraq

Is there anything sillier than neocons strutting around touting this victory? You'd think they'd be a bit chastened by the the arduous and deadly reversal of their own fuckup.

and remove the evil Hussein and his sons from doing any more harm. How much more evil would they have perpetrated if left in power? If Iraq continues to stabilize,

Brilliant victory, to bad it it required a crushing invasion that killed tens of thousands and led to civil war and ethnic cleansing that makes Saddam's reign look like a tea party, which is quite a feat.

It's weird that so many war supporters who claim to have feelings for the Iraqis seem to count 5 years of murder and death rates that were way higher than when Saddam was in power, the collapse of one of the most tolerant cultures in the region into genocide and ethnic cleansing, the collapse of the infrastructure and economy and the fleeing of millions of refugees as any kind of victory for the Iraqi people.

I suppose if Iraqis ever achieve a society as functional and advanced and secure as the dark days of the sanctions during the '90s, we'll be expected to revere Bush as a strategic god.

This is window dressing, to undercut Iraq as leverage for Obama against McCain.

Cheney is probably thinking: All our troops will be in Iran by then anyway.

"but the reality is that Americans and Iraqi Muslems teamed up shoulder to shoulder to pulverize Al Quaeda in Iraq"

This has to be the single most asinine thing Ive seen to date. The debate of the outcome of our Iraq misadventure is fair game, but there is no debate on the stupidity, baselessness and recklessness on which we embarked on this endeavour. Nor is there a debate on the amount of carnage we unleashed because of it.

Clue for you - there was no 'Al Quaeda in Iraq' until they followed the US there. So we should be happy that a murderous group formed in opposition to our involvement there which caused unknown loss of life, injury and destruction and that when we finally quelled it we should be thankful? Seriously, this makes you proud?

pattonbt,

Your partisanship and the certainty of your opinions precludes any reasonable discussion. Sure, there is "no debate" because you are smarter than everyone else and you are all knowing about what happend and what would have happened if we had not removed Hussein. Good night.

I wouldn't lay any of the blame for the war crimes which comprise Iraq on American Muslims, you anonymous pieces of shit.

Mike K ... if by winning you mean you got to kill some ayrabs who had nothing to do with 9-11, and by successfully conning our quasi-racist country into believing otherwise, then yes, that's about all you've won.

As for security, with the increased number of terrorists created, the lack of goodwill for America after an illegal invasion and systematic torture policies, then all I can say is that I hope none of your friends and family live in actual blue-state cities, as they will likely be the target of the blowback for this war.

Cheers.

I call BS. This is a political stunt. We announce victory, set a timetable and suddenly the war looks like a great idea and people warm to the idiotic Neo-Con gunboat diplomacy. McCain wins and then... "Did we say 2011? Our bad, we meant 2110. Just a typo."

But do, even if it is a political stunt, it will be a political stunt in which the Republican president acknowledges that we need a timetable to withdraw our troops. That's game, set, and match right there on the politics of it.

And let's applaud Barack Obama on this one - he was one of the first out of the gate with a date-specific withdrawal timetable back I think in 2006 or 2007, he took a huge risk (and apparently paid for it in terms of polling) by going to Iraq with an unimaginably successful outcome in getting the political class to amplify Maliki's desire for a timetable, and his brave leadership on this issue looks like has finally paid off in a big way as he forced George Bush to come around to his vision. On the issue of Iraq it's now plainly clear that Barack Obama is already driving our national policy - kudos to him.

Now, what has become of the terms of engagement?

Remember complete immunity of US soldiers AND contractors from Iraqi law?
Remember complete independence of action for US military in arresting Iraqis?

The devil is still in the details.

Irony alert: Brian, everyone's favorite faux-reasonable Republican concern troll, wrote Your partisanship and the certainty of your opinions precludes any reasonable discussion.

Brian, no one is fooled by your pose as a reasonable commentator -- sepecially when your mask slips with statements like "Have any of you guys given any thought to celebrating that we are winning the war and helping the future safety of America and the world, rather than celebrating we are going to get out?"

No one imagines you're here for "reasonable discussion," or regards you as anything other than a GOP shill here to spew tiredly predictable talking points. Sadly for you, Bush and the neocons have ruined the GOP's decades-long branding effort as strong on defense, and your feeble efforts to reinforce this bogus image are laughable, but not respectable.

Hey all you folks who talk about this inhibiting our ability to "WIN" this... 'war'. What exactly is considered a win? Which official has ever defined in any clear terms what the preconditions are of us.. "winning" anyways?

For that matter, which 'war' are we talking about here? War in Iraq or War on Terror? You could conceivably justify keeping the US ramped up in a full scale war until the end of time if winning is defined as - until all terrorism anywhere stops.

OH wait - thats the point isn't it?

Slight point of disagreement with the esteemed Gregory. I'm as amused as the next girl at Brian's clumsy attempts to vaccinate himself against apt charges of pathological wingerhood by sadly observing that his conversational opponents are, sigh, not objective, but I don't think he realizes it's a pose. I believe he's by now actually convinced himself that he's an evenhanded observer in a world of grievously biased lefties. If only we'd shape up, we could all have a decent conversation under Brian's gentle guidance.

That doesn't make him any less of a tool, by the way, but it does step up the comedy quotient.

Still, we're getting out! I'm a little stunned by this even though it's pretty much what I've been expecting for the past few weeks

I'm not stunned. This is just the GOP way to undercut reason for voting Obama. The GOP recognizes the overwhelming public support for getting the hell out. So, hastily put together a timetable for withdrawal, something the Democrats have been insisting on for years. Suddenly, with the election looming, the Repubs think it's a good idea after demanding no timetables over and over again. Once again, the Iraq war is simply used for political gain by the GOP.

full withdrawal of combat troops
Leaving only 12 megabases and 50,000 peacekeeping troops.

I fail to believe I can credit the president Bush with either learning or acting in any interest other than the paymasters which purchase his loyalty.

Therefore, I propose that the war is being fully privatized.

Blackwater mercenaries aren't "combat troops" they're "civilian contractors" which happen to hang assault weapons on their tool-belts.

What's to stop them from staying if they want?

"helping the future safety of America and the world" Now there's a laugh. You do realize the people of the world don't like the US anymore? Bush, Ahmadinejad and Kim Jong Ill were found to be the biggest threats to peace in a Toronto Star / La Presse Canada poll. A survey by Harris Research for the Financial Times: 32% of respondents in five European countries regard the US as THE biggest threat to world peace. The Washington-based Pew Research Centre, 17,000 people in 15 countries: more people concerned about the US presence in Iraq than about Iran's alleged nuclear weapons ambitions.

Flys are now buzzing the steaming pile of what used to be respect for the US, think gaining popular support for US policies will be easy? The DC mafia will have to bribe and twist the arms of foreign politicians, rather than have them follow US virtue because it's the right thing to do.

Brian:

I will cede the stridency of my opinion on Iraq, but I think you will find my thought process on the subject is far from some common far left liberal, loony libertarian or fringe right wing nut ideoligical stand.

It is obvious to any unbiased observer, at this time, with the facts laid bare as they now are, that my statements are indeed fact, not supposition:

"stupidity, baselessness and recklessness" of entering Iraq. Check all accounts for the Bush administration. Poor planning (being kind), shaky evidence (being kind), zero post invasion planning (being kind). And for what?

"amount of carnage we unleashed" by entering Iraq. Exacts unknown from a non-US combatant standpoint (which is over 3,000) but mild estimates are in the tens of thousands. So, check again for the Bush administration.

And just to repeat, Al Queada in Iraq did not exist until it was formed to fight the US in Iraq.

So stop with the faux outrage at my purported 'partisanship and certainty of my opinions'. When facts support ones arguments, they cease being opinions.

And I will easily give you 'we wouldnt know what would have happened if we left Saddam in power'. But we DO know what happened from acting to remove him and it was a cluster f*ck from the get go which resulted in untold death and destruction and the erosion of the US brand world wide for decades to come.