• The Surge is Only the First Step, by Jeff Emanuel. American Thinker October 22, 2007.
• Sharp Drop Seen in US Deaths in Iraq Associated Press. October 23, 2007:

  BAGHDAD (AP) — October is on course to record the second consecutive decline in U.S. military and Iraqi civilian deaths and Americans commanders say they know why: the U.S. troop increase and an Iraqi groundswell against al-Qaida and Shiite militia extremists.

  Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch points to what the military calls "Concerned Citizens" — both Shiites and Sunnis who have joined the American fight. He says he's signed up 20,000 of them in the past four months.

  "I've never been more optimistic than I am right now with the progress we've made in Iraq. The only people who are going to win this counterinsurgency project are the people of Iraq. We've said that all along. And now they're coming forward in masses."

• Resistance is futile: You will be (mis)informed, by Michael Yon. October 22, 2007:

  I was at home in the United States just one day before the magnitude hit me like vertigo: America seems to be under a glass dome which allows few hard facts from the field to filter in unless they are attached to a string of false assumptions. Considering that my trip home coincided with General Petraeus’ testimony before the US Congress, when media interest in the war was (I’m told) unusually concentrated, it’s a wonder my eardrums didn’t burst on the trip back to Iraq. In places like Singapore, Indonesia, and Britain people hardly seemed to notice that success is being achieved in Iraq, while in the United States, Britney was competing for airtime with O.J. in one of the saddest sideshows on Earth.

  No thinking person would look at last year’s weather reports to judge whether it will rain today, yet we do something similar with Iraq news. The situation in Iraq has drastically changed, but the inertia of bad news leaves many convinced that the mission has failed beyond recovery...

An Oil for Food Exposé, by Claudia Rossett. Wall Street Journal October 3, 2007:

Messrs. Khudair and Yacoub described a system corrupt to the core. Their duties inside Saddam Hussein's bureaucracy consisted largely, and officially, of handling and keeping track of kickbacks. That included who had paid and how much, and via which front companies. When Saddam's regime systematized its Oil for Food kickback demands across the board in 2000, keeping track of the graft flowing into Saddam's secret coffers became a job so extensive that the marketing arm of Iraq's Ministry of Oil, known as SOMO (State Oil Marketing Organization) developed an electronic database to track the flow of the "surcharges," as they were called. . . .

Bloggers Meet President Bush in White House

Mudville Gazette on the Milblogger's Sit-down with the Commander in Chief.

Tribute: Sheikh Abdul Sattar Abu Risha and Army Capt. Travis Patriquin

• Obituary: Abdul Sattar Abu Risha Sept. 13, 2007:

  Sheikh Abdul Sattar Abu Risha was a key Sunni Arab ally of the US and Iraqi governments in Iraq's western Anbar province.

  The 37-year-old leader of the Al Bu Risha tribe was killed in a bomb attack near his home in the provincial capital, Ramadi, on Thursday.

  He was reportedly a top target for assassination by al-Qaeda in Iraq, whom he is widely credited with having defeated in much of western Iraq.

  Abu Risha, who also ran a construction and import-export business with offices in Jordan and Dubai, was among a group of tribal leaders who met President George W Bush during his visit to Iraq last week.

  Abu Risha was part of a group of young tribal sheikhs whose power grew after more senior leaders fled Anbar or were killed in the insurgency that gripped the province.

  In September 2006, angered by the killings of both his father and two brothers by al-Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Risha approached the US military about forming an alliance to fight the Sunni extremist group. . . .

• Sunni Tribal Chiefs vow revenge against al-Qaeda Asianews.it Sept. 15, 2007:

  Baghdad (AsiaNews/Agencies) – The funeral of Abdul Sattar Abu Risha, leader of an Iraqi Sunni alliance against Osama bin Laden’s terrorist organisation was transformed into an anti al Qaeda protest. The leader had been collaborating with US forces against the terror group, when a car bomb in Ramadi, chief town in Anbar province, killed him. Today in an internet message al-Qaeda claimed responsibility.

  More than 1,500 mourners attended the funeral in Ramadi. Iraq's national security adviser, interior minister and defence minister all attended the funeral under heavy security, along with the second-in-command of US forces in Iraq, Lt-Gen Raymond Odierno. Mourners chanted "We will take our revenge" and "There is no God but Allah and al-Qaeda is the enemy of Allah" as the procession continued to the family cemetery.

  Sheikh Rashid Majid, a leader of the al-Bufahad tribe in Ramadi, said: "The killing will give us more energy... to continue confronting al-Qaeda members and to dispose of them”.

• With U.S. backing, abu Risha rose from young clan leader to head of Sunni fight against al-Qaida International Herald-Tribune Sept. 13, 2007:

  Smoking profusely, Abu Risha — sporting a pistol at his waist — took endless calls on his cell phone.

  "We fought with our own weapons. I myself fought al-Qaida with my own funds," Abu Risha, who runs a construction and import-export family business with offices in Jordan and Dubai, was quoted by the Wall Street Journal as saying this week.

  He was usually mobbed by crowds and greeted with chants of support every time he shows up on the streets of Ramadi, the war-ravaged provincial capital 115 kilometers (70 miles) west of Baghdad.

  "We owe Abu Risha and his people for giving us back our lives," said Saad Ibrahim, who runs a falafel eatery in the Malaab district of Ramadi where he says bands of al-Qaida fighters ruled supreme until driven out by fighters of Abu Risha's Anbar Awakening Council.

• Iraqis name police station for slain soldier, by Brian Gartlan. Daily Southtown Sept. 17, 2007:

  During his time in Ramadi, Army Capt. Travis Patriquin grew close to the Iraqis.

  He spoke their language. He understood their culture.

  Now some there have honored the slain officer by naming their new police station after him.

  Patriquin, 32, formerly of Lockport, was killed by a roadside bomb in December.

  Before he died, Patriquin built a relationship with Sheik Abdul Sattar Abu Risha . . .

  The police station in Tameen, a district in Ramadi, was dedicated in Patriquin's name last month.

  "I consider it an honor," said his father, Gary Patriquin. "(Sattar) thought highly enough of my son to make him a part of his tribe."

• Captain Travis Patriquin - "An American Martyr" BlackFive.net Sept. 6, 2007.

Petraeus Report

• Gen. Petraeus reports to Congress, by Bill Roggio. The Long War Journal Sept. 10, 2007:

  Gen. David Petraeus, the commander of Multinational Forces Iraq, has released the much anticipated report to Congress. . . . Petraeus stated the military aspect of the surge has succeeded in reducing violence and has "generated momentum," the Iraqi Security Forces are growing while taking on a greater role in securing the country, and political progress at the local level will allow US forces to draw down the surge brigades. He predicted the force levels can be drawn down from 20 to 15 combat brigades starting in December and ending by July 2008, given that progress in the security situation continues. Ultimately, Petraeus advised against drawing down forces to conduct a strictly counterinsurgency and support role.

  Petraeus also focused a significant amount of time to Iran's involvement with the Special Groups and the rogue Mahdi Army. The threat of Iran's involvement was not fully understood until just this year. "None of us earlier this year appreciated the extent of Iranian involvement in Iraq, something about which we and Iraq’s leaders all now have greater concern," said Petraeus.

• Listening to Petraeus: The president had the courage to change course on Iraq. Does Congress?, by John McCain and Joe Leiberman. Wall Street Journal Sept. 10, 2007.

• Trashing Petraeus: Moveon.org and the new standards of Democratic debate Wall Street Journal September 11, 2007:

  Important as was yesterday's appearance before Congress by General David Petraeus, the events leading up to his testimony may have been more significant. Members of the Democratic leadership and their supporters have now normalized the practice of accusing their opponents of lying. If other members of the Democratic Party don't move quickly to repudiate this turn, the ability of the U.S. political system to function will be impaired in a way no one would wish for.

• Petraeus’s Success, by Charles Krauthammer. National Review Sept. 14, 2007.

Is The "Surge" Working?

• How life returned to the streets in a showpiece city that drove out al-Qaeda - An American ‘martyr’ is being hailed in the Sunni Triangle for restoring peace to a town where soldiers now fight only water leaks. Times Online August 31, 2007:

  Captain Patriquin may have offered more than mere words. His main interlocutor, Sheikh Abdul Sittar Bezea al-Rishawi, told The Times that he gave them guns and ammunition too. The sheikhs did rise up. They formed a movement called the Anbar Awakening, led by Sheikh Sittar. They persuaded thousands of their tribesmen to join the Iraqi police, which was practically defunct thanks to al-Qaeda death threats, and to work with the reviled US troops. The US military built a string of combat outposts (COPs) throughout a city that had previously been a no-go area, and through a combination of Iraqi local knowledge and American firepower they gradually regained control of Ramadi, district by district, until the last al-Qaeda fighters were expelled in three pitched battles in March. What happened in Ramadi was later replicated throughout much of Anbar province.

  Ramadi’s transformation is breathtaking. Shortly before I arrived last November masked al-Qaeda fighters had brazenly marched through the city centre, pronouncing it the capital of a new Islamic caliphate. The US military was still having to fight its way into the city through a gauntlet of snipers, rocket-propelled grenades, suicide car bombs and improvised explosive devices (IEDs). Fifty US soldiers had been killed in the previous five months alone. I spent 24 hours huddled inside Eagles Nest, a tiny COP overlooking the derelict football stadium, listening to gunfire, explosions and the thump of mortars. The city was a ruin, with no water, electricity or functioning government. Those of its 400,000 terrified inhabitants who had not fled cowered indoors as fighting raged around them.

  Today Ramadi is scarcely recognisable. Scores of shattered buildings testify to the fury of past battles, but those who fled the violence are now returning. Pedestrians, cars and motorbike rickshaws throng the streets. More than 700 shops and businesses have reopened. Restaurants stay open late into the evening. People sit outside smoking hookahs, listening to music, wearing shorts – practices that al-Qaeda banned. Women walk around with uncovered faces. Children wave at US Humvees. Eagles’ Nest, a heavily fortified warren of commandeered houses, is abandoned and the stadium hosts football matches.

  “Al-Qaeda is gone. Everybody is happy,” said Mohammed Ramadan, 38, a stallholder in the souk who witnessed four executions. “It was fear, pure fear. Nobody wanted to help them but you had to do what they told you.”

• Back from Hell: Baghdad's Haifa Street Story, by Ralph Peters. New York Post August 31, 2007:

  IF you saw any news clips of intense combat last January, you were probably watching the fighting unfolding on Baghdad's Haifa Street: 10 days of grim sectarian violence. Until we put a stop to it.

• Surge Working": Top US General, by Dennis Shanahan. The Australian August 31, 2007:

  David Petraeus, the top US commander in Iraq, said the build-up of American forces in Baghdad since late January had produced positive outcomes. These included the killing or capture of al-Qa'ida fighters, causing the terrorist group to lose influence with local Sunnis.

  The strategic gains against insurgents would lead to a changed and possibly longer-term role for Australian troops, shifting from security operations to a focus on training Iraqi soldiers and police.

  General Petraeus told The Australian during a face-to-face interview at his Baghdad headquarters there had been a 75 per cent reduction in religious and ethnic killings since last year, a doubling in the seizure of insurgents' weapons caches between January and August, a rise in the number of al-Qa'ida "kills and captures" and a fall in the number of coalition deaths from roadside bombings.

• Behind the Numbers In from the Cold August 31, 2007:

  Ahead of General Petraeus's report on the troop surge (due in a couple of weeks), the monthly casualty stories provide an opportunity for the MSM to prepare their "backdrop" for his assessment. It's a safe bet the press reporting will highlight the "failures" of Iraq's government, despite significant progress by coalition security forces. In a similar vein, the most casualty totals can be used to paint the "high cost" at which that progress was achieved.

  With the end of the month just a few hours away in Baghdad, the U.S. fatality total for August stands at 79--the same number recorded last month. That will likely generate such headlines as "American deaths hold steady in August," or "Combat deaths inch upward," (assuming that there are additional fatalities that have not yet been reported by DoD). In either case, the implication is the same: We're still losing 80 soldiers a month, so our "progress" is clearly limited.

  But that analysis is wrong on multiple levels. . . .

The pope next takes up pacifism, which can have its witnesses, but which can also be a mask for not doing what is necessary to protect freedom and justice. Here, he remarks, we have demonstrated "on the basis of a historical event that absolute pacifism is unsustainable." Notice the careful use of these words. The grounds for war are to be demonstrated by what is actually going on in this or that country, in this or that time. It is not an abstraction but a concrete realization of the power and nature of a regime that seems to extend its force and limits. This is why the pope says, as I cited above, "there is no such thing as an a-historical State based on abstract reasoning."

The pope is careful to retain the "just war" context of these considerations. The just war theory was developed in Christian and classical thought precisely to explain why honorable regimes must at times defend themselves or others in the very name of justice. We still must ask if "just war" is possible and a duty in every occasion where use of force arises. The answer cannot ever be an "unequivocal" never. It depends on judgment and prudence. This is how the pope defines a just war: "a military intervention conducted in the interests of peace and according to moral criteria against unjust regimes." This means that "peace and law" and "peace and justice" are connected. "When law is trampled on and injustice comes to power, peace is always threatened and is already to some extent broken. In this sense a commitment to peace is above all a commitment to a form of law that guarantees justice for the individual and for the entire community." Clearly this means that a military and police component to the very possibility of law and justice is presupposed. The allowing of law to be "trampled" on and of "injustice" to come to power is clearly a sign of civic blindness and moral irresponsibility. This position was also the gist of C. S. Lewis' famous essay "Why I Am Not a Pacifist," found in his Weight of Glory.

. . . Referring back to the logic of the cold war, the pope granted that it still retained some intelligible rationale. "As long as this potential for destruction (nuclear and biological weapons) remained exclusively in the hands of the major powers, one could always hope that reason and the awareness of the dangers weighing upon the people and the State could rule out the use of the type of weaponry. Indeed, despite all the tensions between East and West, we were spared a full-scale war, thanks be to God." This passage, I would say, is a belated acknowledgement (though John Paul II said the same thing) that deterrence did work and the fact that increased accuracy of technology and weaponry finally convinced the Soviets that they could not keep up achieved its purpose.

However, the terrorist situation is different. "We can no longer count on such reasoning (mutual deterrence and rational comprehension), because the readiness to engage in self-destruction is one of the basic components of terrorism—a kind of self-destruction that is exalted as martyrdom and transformed into a promise" (91). Presumably, the pope does not equate Muslim terrorists with organized crime in this sense. The gangster or dope runner is not seeking martyrdom whereas the Muslim terrorist, in his own rationale, is. The gangster is in it for power and money, not for religion.

The pope still thinks that this terrorism itself can be met but by careful means. "One cannot put an end to terrorism—a force that is opposed to the law and cut off from morality—solely by means of force. It is certain that, in defending the law against a force that aims to destroy law, one can and in certain circumstances must make use of proportionate force in order to protect it." This is clearly the reasonable, common-sense position. Again the pope adds, "An absolute pacifism that denies the law any and all coercive measures would be capitulation to injustice, would sanction its seizure of power, and would abandon the world to the dictates of violence." Again, these are memorable words much in need of recollection and emphasis.

"No Weighing, No Disputing, No Such Thing": Ratzinger and Europe , by Fr. James V. Schall. Ignatius Insight (Review of Europe: Today and Tomorrow by Benedict XVI. (Ignatius Press, March 2007).

U.S. must honestly assess what is achievable in Iraq, says archbishop, by Julie Asher. Catholic News Service. May 30, 2007

BROOKLYN, N.Y. (CNS) -- At this stage in the Iraq War, the United States "must honestly assess what is achievable in Iraq using the traditional just-war principle of 'probability of success,' including the probability of contributing to a responsible transition," said Archbishop Edwin F. O'Brien.

The U.S. and its allies "also have a grave responsibility, even at a high cost, to help Iraqis secure and rebuild their nation," unless the conclusion is reached that "a responsible transition is not achievable," he said.

The archbishop, who heads the U.S. Archdiocese for the Military Services, made the comments in a Memorial Day pastoral message to Catholic men and women in the U.S. armed forces. He delivered the same message at a packed session May 25 during the 2007 Catholic Media Convention in Brooklyn. [...]

Unfortunately, what many Catholic leaders and others predicted would happen in Iraq -- the chaos and the difficulties of consolidating peace -- has come true, he said.

What was missing at the outset of the war was a comprehensive blueprint to administer and restore Iraq after Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was deposed, Archbishop O'Brien said. "There was not sufficient foresight about what we might do after our seeming victory."

The archbishop argued against pulling out of Iraq now, and said the U.S. must look at what is achievable. He added that military personnel feel that Americans at the grass-roots level still support them.

He thinks there is still a chance to have a free Iraq and see democracy spread through the region.

Archbishop O'Brien compared the Iraq situation to the Vietnam War. He was an Army chaplain in the early 1970s and served a year in Vietnam. The U.S. was gaining the upper hand there, he said, until the Tet offensive conducted by the North Vietnamese. Technically, it was a failed military action but it was a turning point in the war.

Political sentiment turned against U.S. involvement and the U.S. pulled out, but the archbishop said he thinks the U.S. still could have gotten the upper hand had it stayed.

During a question-and-answer session after the archbishop's address, one member of the audience argued that the American people were conned into getting into the war. Another said many opponents of the war feel the decision to invade Iraq was advanced by a small group of neoconservatives who wanted to get their hands on Iraq's vast oil supplies.

Archbishop O'Brien disagreed with both notions.

He said that "reasonable people can disagree" about the war. He said he could see why some might feel the nation was conned because there is a great deal of skepticism about the war, but added, "I don't think there was bad will on the part of the government" in deciding to go to war.

He also said, "I don't agree this was the invention of a small group that wanted oil."

Encouraging News from the Front

• From Bill Roggio's Iraq Report: Attacking Mahdi, al Qaeda prison camp in Diyala May 27, 2007:

  This morning, U.S. and Iraq forces struck yet again against the Mahdi Army in Sadr City. The joint force captured yet another member of a network "known for facilitating the transport of weapons and explosively formed penetrators, or EFPs, from Iran to Iraq, as well as bringing militants from Iraq to Iran for terrorist training." This is the third such raid in Sadr City in 48 hours. Seventeen members of this network have been killed and 32 captured during numerous raids over the past three weeks. . . .

  In Diyala province, where al Qaeda has established a stronghold, Iraqi and U.S. security forces have broke up an al Qaeda "prison camp" and captured 7 al Qaeda during two separate raids. Today, a joint U.S. and Iraqi Army raid rescued 41 Iraqi civilians "showing signs of having been tortured or mistreated" from an al Qaeda run prison camp just south of the city of Baqubah. "Many of them showing signs of mistreatment ranging from broken bones and bruises to heat injuries caused by being held with insufficient water," AFP noted.

• Memorial Day Message from Michael Yon, milblogger and combat photographer Michael Yon has good news from Mosul:

  Long-time readers know that I deliver bad news with the good. I was first to write that parts of Iraq were in civil war back in February 2005, well over a year before mainstream outlets started reporting the same. I was also the first to report, back in 2005, that Mosul was making a turn for the better. Mainstream outlets hardly picked up on that story, however, although the turn was easy to see for anyone who was there. When I returned from Afghanistan in the spring of 2006, after writing about the growing threat of a resurgent Taliban, bankrolled with profits from the heroin trade, I wrote that parts of our own military were censoring media in Iraq. The recent skirmishing over blogging from Iraq supports that contention. These reminders are for new readers who do not believe that a province that most media outlets had put at the top of the “hopelessly lost” column is actually turning a corner for the better. . . .

  Although there is sharp fighting in Diyala Province, and Baghdad remains a battleground, and the enemy is trying to undermine security in areas they’d lost interest in, the fact is that the security plan, or so-called “surge,” is showing clear signs of progress.

  Note If I had to recommend two blogs for daily reporting on Iraq and the WOT, it would be Michael Yon and Bill Roggio.

Vatican signals support for international meeting on Iraq, by Cindy Wooden. Catholic News Service. May 4, 2007:

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- The Vatican signaled its support for the international meeting on Iraq that took place in Egypt in early May, and Iraq's Chaldean bishops asked participating countries to do more to end violence and protect Christians in the country.

After former Iranian President Mohammad Khatami met Pope Benedict XVI May 4, the Vatican published a statement saying the two leaders reaffirmed "the need for strong initiatives by the international community, like that occurring in these days at the meeting in Sharm el Sheikh," Egypt, to bring peace to the Middle East.

More than 50 nations sent representatives to the May 3-4 meeting in Egypt to discuss debt relief, aid and security in Iraq. The participants included the United States and other members of the U.N. Security Council, the world's richest countries and nations bordering Iraq, including Iran.

WMD's.

• WMD's and the Iraq War, by Deal Hudson. April 17, 2007:

  During the period leading up to the Iraq War, I was in regular conversation with the White House as part of what is called the Catholic Working Group. Karl Rove asked me to create this group after the 2000 election.

  We had many discussions with White House and Defense Department personnel about just war theory and the proposed invasion of Iraq. They were all well-versed in the basic principles.

  Our central concern . . . was not the issue of whether all other means had been exhausted -- we thought they had -- but whether there was a an immediate danger to the United States.

  That's where WMDs came in.

  On one call with the White House we were all assured by a senior administration official that he had "absolute and certain proof" of WMDs. I asked if he could share the evidence with us. He said "no" but that we should "trust" him.

  Since this was someone I had known for a number of years in other circumstances, I had no reason not to believe him. (He, perhaps, had no reason not to believe the person who told him he had "absolute and certain proof" and so on.)

  We believed him.

• ‘I found Saddam’s WMD bunkers’, by Melanie Phillips. The Spectator (UK) No. 21 April 2007:

  It’s a fair bet that you have never heard of a guy called Dave Gaubatz. It’s also a fair bet that you think the hunt for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq has found absolutely nothing, nada, zilch; and that therefore there never were any WMD programmes in Saddam’s Iraq to justify the war ostensibly waged to protect the world from Saddam’s use of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons.

  Dave Gaubatz, however, says that you could not be more wrong. Saddam’s WMD did exist. He should know, because he found the sites where he is certain they were stored. And the reason you don’t know about this is that the American administration failed to act on his information, ‘lost’ his classified reports and is now doing everything it can to prevent disclosure of the terrible fact that, through its own incompetence, it allowed Saddam’s WMD to end up in the hands of the very terrorist states against whom it is so controversially at war.

Recommended Reading

• Vindicating Douglas Feith New York Sun February 12, 2007.

• Tough Questions We Were Right to Ask, by Douglas J. Feith. Washington Post Wednesday, February 14, 2007.

• A conversation with Douglas J. Feith: "When is it appropriate to scrub the consensus?" RedState.com. February 16, 2007.

• Iraq in Books, by Michael Rubin. Middle East Quarterly Spring 2007:

  The Iraq war has pumped adrenaline into the publishing industry. Whereas five years ago, few bookstores included any selections on Iraq, today dozens of Iraq books line the shelves. There have been three waves of Iraq-related publishing: First came the embed accounts that described the military campaign; second were examinations of prewar planning and, third, studies of the occupation. Quantity does not equal quality, though, nor does popularity correlate to accuracy. Many of the most popular books have been deeply flawed. Many authors use their Iraq narrative to promote other agendas, be they related to U.S. domestic politics, U.N. empowerment, or independence for Kurdistan. Other authors have substituted theory for fact or tried to propel their experience into the center of the Iraq policy debate. While time has already relegated much Iraq-related writing to the secondhand shelf or dustbin, several authors have produced works that will make lasting contributions, be they to future generations of war and post-conflict reconstruction planners, or scholars looking more deeply into the fabric of Iraq.

• The Evidence On Iran PowerLine February 17, 2007. (See also The Smoking Gun, Redux

• The war in the shadows against Iran & Sadr, by Bill Roggio. February 14, 2007. The Fourth Rail :

  While the U.S. military and intelligence proceeds cautiously on exposing Iran's involvement in Iraq's insurgency, and treads carefully on exposing Muqtada al-Sadr's backing of the Shia death squads, a war is being fought in the shadows - a war which we only see glimpses of. The war has escalated enough that Muqtada al-Sadr has left Iraq for safe environs in Iran. . . .

• The Battle for Baghdad Begins StrategyPage.com. February 15, 2007:

  How are the bad guys doing in Iraq? The Iraqi media is full of information on what the various Sunni, Shia and Kurdish factions are up to. Lots of the reporting is speculation, but a lot of it is not. If you've been following the action long enough, you can pick out the accurate stories. And the talk on the street and in the shops is also pretty dependable. That said, most people believe al Qaeda in Iraq is finished. . . .

Reactions to the Iraq Study Group Report

Iraq Study Group: Change Iraq strategy now CNN.com. Dec. 6, 2006:

In a highly anticipated report being released Wednesday, the Iraq Study Group will call for a dramatic shift in war policy by urging the Bush administration to set a target of moving most U.S. troops out of their combat roles by early 2008, according to two sources who have seen the executive summary of the report.

The bipartisan panel, however, will stop short of a specific timetable for withdrawal.

"The primary mission of U.S. forces in Iraq should evolve into one of supporting the Iraqi Army," says the report.

It adds: "It's clear the Iraqi government will need U.S. assistance for some time to come, especially in carrying out new security responsibilities. Yet the U.S. must not make open-ended commitments to keep large numbers of troops deployed in Iraq."

Sources familiar with the report, which will be presented to President Bush at the White House early Wednesday morning, said it also prods the administration to launch a new diplomatic initiative to solve the Israel-Palestinian conflict.

The report contends the United States "cannot achieve its goals in the Mideast" unless it embarks on a "renewed and sustained commitment to a comprehensive peace plan on all fronts," according to the sources who have seen the report.

As part of this initiative, the panel calls for direct talks between the United States and Iran, as well as Syria, a move the Bush administration has repeatedly resisted.

The Iraq Study group report will be downloadable at the following websites:

• United States Institute of Peace (www.usip.org)
• James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy (www.bakerinstitute.org)
• The Center for Strategic and International Studies (www.csis.org)

Reactions

• The Iraq Study Group's self-contradiction, by Donald Sensing. Winds of Change Dec. 7, 2006:

  . . . on the one hand, the ISG says the US is facing a real crisis in Iraq and that time is short to change direction. Then, on the other, the ISG offers recommendations that even it (unanimously) says is "not likely to happen quickly." The ISG wants to start withdrawing US combat units from Iraq by 2008, but did it stop to think that it's highly unlikely for any of its regional initiatives and conferences even to be scheduled by then? The wheels of the gods and diplomats grind exceedingly slow, something James Baker should have remembered. Syria and Iraq have no obvious incentive to engage with us at all, a fact that Messrs. Baker and Hamilton tacitly admitted. To imagine that Assad and Ahmandinejad will jump at the chance to assist the US in achieving its goals in Iraq is the triumph of hope over experience. If anything, they'll see the report as a sign of the slackening of American will and pretend to engage while making sure that the "peace process" drags on interminably. (We do, after all, have a track record of being victiom of that tactic, just recall the Paris peace talks with Hanoi, in which the North Vietnamese delegation spent most of a year doing nothing but arguing about the shape and height of the negotiation table.)

• Assessment of the Iraq Study Group Report, by Marc Schulman on Lebanon. American Future Dec. 6, 2006.
• We've Been Talking: It's a myth that the U.S. hasn't already engaged Syria and Iran, by Joel Himelfarb. The Wall Street Journal Dec. 6, 2006:

  Based on the historical record, the advocates of U.S. engagement with these regimes are delusional. The record, from Carter to Bush II, strongly suggests that neither regime has any interest in cooperating with us in Iraq, and are more likely than not to view the Carter-Brzezinski-Hagel approach as a demonstration of American weakness.

• Will Iraq Study Group’s Plan Work on the Battlefield?, by Michael R. Gordon. New York Times Dec. 7, 2008.

Gold Star Families Travel to Iraq

The Gold Star Families Iraq Survey Group has released a new report, "A Brighter Future for Iraq," to help enhance the debate and discussions concerning the United States’ commitment to achieve success with the mission of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

The authors of this report have all traveled to Iraq since the commencement of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Seven of the individuals are known as “Gold Star Families” as they have lost a son in the war effort. Two of the individuals, Gold Star Father Joe Johnson and Marine Reservist John Ubaldi, served in Operation Iraqi Freedom themselves. Additionally, group member Melanie Morgan led a delegation to Iraq in 2005 where she had the opportunity to speak with both U.S. and Iraqi military leaders.

It is not by accident that the majority of this group is comprised of men and women who lost their child in Operation Iraqi Freedom. They are presenting their findings and recommendations to ensure that the United States adopts a policy in Iraq that will enhance American security that their children fought to preserve. Their children believed in the importance of the mission in Iraq, and so too do these parents.

-- Source: Move America Forward MoveAmericaForward.org carries the report of the "Gold Star Families"

Bill Roggio on "The Military and the Media"

In nearly every conversation, the soldiers, Marines and contractors expressed they were upset with the coverage of the war in Iraq in general, and the public perception of the daily situation on the ground. The felt the media was there to sensationalize the news, and several stated some reporters were only interested in “blood and guts.” They freely admitted the obstacles in front of them in Iraq. Most recognized that while we are winning the war on the battlefield, albeit with difficulties in some areas, we are losing the information war. They felt the media had abandoned them.

During each conversation, I was left in the awkward situation of having to explain that while, yes, I am wearing a press badge, I'm not 'one of them.' I used descriptions like 'independent journalist' or 'blogger' in an attempt to separate myself from the pack.

What a terrible situation to be in, having to defend yourself because of your profession. I've always said that the hardest thing about embedding (besides leaving my family) is wearing the badge that says 'PRESS.' That hasn't changed. I hide the badge whenever I can get away with it.

-- "The Military and the Media"