‘Transition’ or ‘withdrawal’?
By on May 22nd, 2006 at 12:48 pm
‘Transition’ or ‘withdrawal’?
The London Times and Raw Story report that a phased withdrawal from Iraq is beginning. “It will be described as a ‘transition’ to Iraqi security forces taking control of the country rather than a withdrawal to avoid it looking as though the allies are being forced out by rising levels of attacks on their forces.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
… and instead of Iraq “descending” or “spiralling downward” into all-out civil war, it’ll surely be phrased as a “transition to a decentralized form of government.”
May 22nd, 2006 at 12:52 pmTransition, silly…a withdrawal is what happens when the terrists win
May 22nd, 2006 at 12:55 pmWhat happened to “Stay the course.”?
May 22nd, 2006 at 12:58 pmHell, the election is only 5 1/2 months away. Is there enough time to reap the full benefit of a timed withdrawal, oops, I mean transition?
May 22nd, 2006 at 1:02 pmIf the US starts the “transition” of troops I hope that someone will ask if this was a decision made by the troops on the ground. Because thats where Bush said troop level decisions are being made. If he spoke it..it must be true..
May 22nd, 2006 at 1:08 pmSid Blumenthal wrote about this months ago in Salon.
May 22nd, 2006 at 1:17 pm
All Hail Emperor Bush.
Such a success, he is. NOT!
May 22nd, 2006 at 1:27 pmWho cares what its called as long as troops are on american soil. Oh I forgot, you guys care what its called because if its called withdrawal, somehow you win but if its called transition, the “other side” wins. Enough of this game. America needs its troops back.
May 22nd, 2006 at 1:28 pmGreg, I don’t think anybody wants to keep our troops in harms way for a minute longer than necessary. But its the chronicled history of incompetence that troubles most on the left, and those that see reality on the right that scares us. Will troops be ripped out from their posts and leave OTHER soldiers in MORE danger? Will dubya actually have a plan that doesn’t leave our existing forces in more danger? THAT is the danger!
Also, the troops will probably YET AGAIN be used as political props for dubya, I can see the parades down main street america, with dubya riding along with the generals, with yet another “Mission Accomplished” banner in the background. The troops deserve a monthly parade and recognition for all that they have done, and all the sacrifices they have made, but they should benefit the TROOPS and not some political party.
May 22nd, 2006 at 1:35 pm#9 – what happend to the “stay the course” plan? What happend to the “finish the job we started” plan? What happens when we withdraw and they fall deeper into this civil war? How is this any different than what we did in Vietnam?
As Powell said – this is the pottery barn war – you break it, you fix it!!!!
May 22nd, 2006 at 1:37 pm#9 – one more thing – how does this differ from what the republicans said would happen if Kerry were elected? Your memory seems to suffer so I will remind you – they said he would “cut and run.”
May 22nd, 2006 at 1:40 pmBush will not pull the troops out of Iraq as long as he is president and Sen. Hillary has promised to keep the troops in Iraq as long as she is preseident after 2008 > screw them both!
May 22nd, 2006 at 1:41 pm“Mission Accomplished”? Or cut and run? Or democracy wins out in the Middle East? Or WMD found? Or yellow cake leads to nukes? Or insurgents are the Taliban? Or Osama doesn’t matter any more?
We’d never know if all we listened to were representatives from the Bush Cabal and their media lapdogs.
May 22nd, 2006 at 1:53 pmBERLIN: Germany is prepared to accept the current state of Iran’s nuclear research if Tehran agrees to place its nuclear programme under international surveillance, according to Monday’s edition of the magazine Der Spiegel.
Quoting government sources, the German news magazine says the concessions would include acknowledging Tehran’s achievements in uranium enrichment, but in return Iran would have to allow international organisations to monitor its nuclear activity.
In Tehran, A prominent Iranian MP has proposed talks with lawmakers from the United States over the nuclear programme, a press report said on Sunday. “Some space must be opened so that we can talk to US public opinion, its thinkers and even lawmakers,†said Kazem Jalali, spokesman for the Iranian parliament’s influential national security and foreign affairs commission. “Negotiations between two hostile states can be a positive step,†he was quoted as saying by the Teheran Times newspaper.
May 22nd, 2006 at 3:33 pmShorter Poodle + W: “It’s not cutting & running if WE propose it”
May 22nd, 2006 at 4:42 pmOh yeah Bushie, this is indeed a “watershed” moment. Who in the hell are you trying to kid?
Ive heard your shitty speech before, and now we will hear it over and over again.
Democracy in the middle east? You kidding, it is not a democracy, it is a REPUBLICAN government ran by idiots in the green zone, all neo-cons, and by your handpicked Iraqi stooges.
Bushie boy, you have no idea what a DEMOCRACY is. You lost your chance to pilot one when you invaded Iraq.
May 22nd, 2006 at 5:22 pmVietnamization, 2006 edition.
May 22nd, 2006 at 8:43 pm