Government Agency Issues Grim Report On Iraq, Warns Of ‘Descent Into Hell’
Government Agency Issues Grim Report On Iraq, Warns Of ‘Descent Into Hell’
At his press conference this morning, President Bush said we are “absolutely” winning in Iraq, but a government-funded nonpartisan agency — the U.S. Institute of Peace — has released “an unremittingly grim report” ruling out victory in Iraq. Here are three of agency’s predictions for the future of Iraq:
1. “The Long Shot to Overcome Ethnic and Sectarian Politics” (most optimistic scenario): “This is an Iraq that slowly, in fits and starts, trudges down the difficult road of creating a functioning state.”
2. “Lebanonization” (militias wage a civil war in the capital): “Unable to maintain control, the United States is itself a target when it becomes involved. … U.S. troops largely retreat behind fortifications, distant from population centers, and head north to Kurdistan.”
3. “Descent Into Hell” (worst-case scenario): Most of Iraq’s neighbors are drawn into open regional warfare, and it ends with Iran conducting strikes against Saudi Arabia’s oil industry.
The report concludes that “avoidance of disaster and maintenance of some modicum of political stability in Iraq are more realistic goals” than the Bush administration’s expressed goal of “an Iraq that is peaceful, united, stable, democratic, and secure.”
The USIP is helping the Iraq Study Group with its report and this “latest study could foreshadow the tone of [former Secretary of State James] Baker’s upcoming report.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
55 Responses to “Government Agency Issues Grim Report On Iraq, Warns Of ‘Descent Into Hell’”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
I'm sure the descent into hell reference is for those who doubt the "not stay the course, no timetables for withdrawl" strategy.
October 25th, 2006 at 11:34 amUh-huh...
Well, ladies and gentlemen, welcome to our 367th turning of the Iraqi corner!
All hail our Glorious Leadership!
October 25th, 2006 at 11:38 amWhy does a government-funded nonpartisan agency hate our troops, hate America, hate our freedom, coddle Osama bin Laden, side with the terrorists, and bring comfort to our enemies?
October 25th, 2006 at 11:39 amfrom what i see and read about iraq, it is too late, iraq is already hell,
October 25th, 2006 at 11:40 amthanks to god and bush.
The Republicans will take care of this problem, and thank God they are ahead in the polls.
Republicans Lead in the Honest-to-God Poll.
Yippie!
October 25th, 2006 at 11:41 amAt his press conference this morning, President Bush said we are “absolutely†winning in Iraq...
Then Bush needs to explain it to Tony Snow. As readers may recall, at a recent press conference a reporter asked Tony Snow if we were winning in Iraq. Tony responded, "I don't know. How do you define winning?"
October 25th, 2006 at 11:45 amWell if we can get past the 6 million purged voters, the 70 million who will vote on hackable machines, and the untold numbers of people who will be turned away for lack of a photo ID, we might just have a shot. Bring 5 friends to vote with you.
Goper's Lament (Hard To BE A Republican)
October 25th, 2006 at 11:46 amThat's not what Bush said today! He said there is an "entrepenuerial class" in Iraq that Americans don't see!
Bush said we're not getting the whole picture!
October 25th, 2006 at 11:49 amHow very awkward!!!
#5...that is hilarious! Thanks for the laff!
October 25th, 2006 at 11:54 amTo say this is a Civil War would assume that there would be a working government that people are splitting from right? Well there doesn't seem to be a working government. So wouldn't this be more of a Revolutionary War?
October 25th, 2006 at 11:56 amSounds like it's time for the chickenhawk keyboard warriors to get up off their overfed asses and sign up for military service--right now!--so this war can be won!
Too bad their idol Rush "Pills" Limbaugh wasn't able to serve back in Vietnam because of that pimple on his ass; maybe we coulda won that one if His Lardiness had been there.
October 25th, 2006 at 11:57 amPay no attention to that Bush man behind the curtain! Everything is gping swimingly!
October 25th, 2006 at 12:00 pmIs this the precursor to the "Department of Peace" that Congressman Blount claims that Democrats would establish if they take control after the mid-terms?
October 25th, 2006 at 12:04 pmAt his press conference this morning, President Bush said we are “absolutely†winning in Iraq…
October 25th, 2006 at 12:04 pmThen Bush needs to explain it to Tony Snow.
- - Yesterday on 'Hardball' Matthews asked Snow point blank if we were winning the war in Iraq and Snow gave an unequivocal "Yes," with no accompanying reasons why.
Wait, we already _have_ a Department of Peace? Somebody needs to tell Roy Blunt.
October 25th, 2006 at 12:06 pmWould you like some freedom fries with that brimstone?
October 25th, 2006 at 12:11 pmIraq already is HELL, thanks to Bush Regime, so NO need for any report!
October 25th, 2006 at 12:12 pmI liked the way the way President Bush boiled down the coming election into two distinct areas of relevance:
1.) Who do you trust to protect the American people?
2.) Do you want your taxes raised?
Some kindly people here at TP believe radical jihadists can be swayed through reason and dialogue - if that were only so! Unfortunately, committed Islamic extremists have demonstrated they are not interested in peaceful co-existence. So much for the Islamic wing of the US Institute for Peace....
And then we have the progs who swear working Americans aren't paying their "fair share" and wish to increase our tax rates. When Senator Harry Reid couldn't define the term "middle-class" during a recent Q&A, I knew we'd be in for a tax hike....
October 25th, 2006 at 12:12 pmThat’s not what Bush said today! He said there is an “entrepenuerial class†in Iraq that Americans don’t see!
Sure we do, it's called Sponsors of think-tanks, Like AEI or PNAC, war as enterprise. it's where the greedy little sychophants get their paychecks for being such good little sociopaths.
October 25th, 2006 at 12:13 pmMA > Karl Rove called and said he needs his hair trimmed, so get over to the Salon in DC and he said wear the Dolly Parton outfit it makes him hot > lol.
October 25th, 2006 at 12:19 pmThe war in Iraq is going very well, for the military industrial complex.
October 25th, 2006 at 12:23 pmFor the Iraqis and the American public, not so well maybe. Their lives are being squandered almost as fast as our borrowed money.
[...] He doesn’t really know the details about what he’s selling, but he won’t admit it. Instead, his annoyed deference to “generals on the ground” or “leaders in Iraq” sounds an awfully lot like “you know, someone in a lab coat makes that decision.” More than that, though, his attempts to convince the public that everything is actually hunky dory, garnished with a clear disdain for being questioned in the first place, make me wonder when he’s going to just blurt out “I’m better than that!” [...]
October 25th, 2006 at 12:28 pmI liked the way the way President Bush boiled down the coming election into two distinct areas of relevance:
1.) Who do you trust to protect the American people?
2.) Do you want your taxes raised?
Comment by mighty+aphrodite
1). On Bushie's watch: 9/11, anthrax, two wars(one illegal), two "axis of evil" countries going nuclear or getting there, stripping of habeus corpus, world disdain for America growing.....must I go on. I think the people know the answer to that one.
2). So he keeps the uber-rich 1% vote.
October 25th, 2006 at 12:34 pm#20 - "MA > Karl Rove called and said he needs his hair trimmed, so get over to the Salon in DC and he said wear the Dolly Parton outfit it makes him hot > lol." - Comment by Jay Randal
******Jay - You're way closer to DC than I am. You're so into trannies, you might want to hurry over and play "Sheriff and the School Marm" with Dolly/Rove.....
Of course, I didn't expect you to discuss the two main points of the election as outlined by GWB and mentioned in post #18. As you continue to demonstrate your inability to discuss issues, I must give you a bit of credit for demonstrating the chutzpah it takes for you to fire up the keyboard.
If you hear how your friend Harry Reid defines middle class, would you ask him to pass the info along - alot of voters are interested in finding out whose taxes are going up and by how much....
October 25th, 2006 at 12:34 pmWhen Bush said "we" he meant the poeple like him and Cheney. Yes if you look at thier profit margins, they are certainly winning.
October 25th, 2006 at 12:37 pmMA the phony lawyer is lecturing us all on the TP threads again > lol. Come out of the closet MA > we all know you are a drag queen, who cuts hair in a Salon in DC, in fact Rove and Mehlman are your best customers!
October 25th, 2006 at 12:38 pmDear Clams - GWB said we had "not lost a battle" and that 5 provinces out of 18 were the areas with concentrated insurgency attacks. I'm certain you meant to correctly repeat what the Pres said and not mis-characterize his statement.....
October 25th, 2006 at 12:38 pmMighty,
Is is possible the next administration would have to raise taxes to address the horrendous deficit?
October 25th, 2006 at 12:43 pmThe 3 defined scenarios are not an "OR" condition only no. 1 and no. 2 are. No. 3 will be the case for the next 2 years at least until bush, cheney, rice, and rumsfeld are gone, followed most likely by no. 3, but possibly no. 1.
October 25th, 2006 at 12:44 pm.
Dear Clams - GWB said we had “not lost a battle†and that 5 provinces out of 18 were the areas with concentrated insurgency attacks. I’m certain you meant to correctly repeat what the Pres said and not mis-characterize his statement…..
Comment by mighty+aphrodite
Would those 5 provinces be where most of the population is, why yes. And the rest, mostly empty desert.
October 25th, 2006 at 12:45 pmAs the following CNN report shows, Bush continues to blame the troops for the failure in Iraq. Is there any wonder that active duty military are now starting to speak out against the strategy (policy).
Just as PFC England was blamed for a substantial part of the failure at Abu Ghrahib the enlisted soldiers are being blamed for failed tactics in Iraq today by Bush. Responsibility is not inverted. Bush is to blame for the outcome in Iraq. What is needed is new leadership rather than fresh, effective troops fighting on the ground. The dumbass in the Whitehouse doesn't understand the basics of leadership.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/10/25/stay.course/index.html
October 25th, 2006 at 12:47 pmBye MA say hello to Rove for me when you give him a French Kiss at the hair Salon today > lol.
October 25th, 2006 at 12:54 pm#29 "Mighty, - Is is possible the next administration would have to raise taxes to address the horrendous deficit?" - Comment by ForTruth
******It is possible the next administration will choose to raise taxes to address the deficit. A more efficient method to address the problem:
1.) Impose term limits on Congress - incumbants from BOTH Parties love to go home and brag how much bacon they've "brought home".
2.) End ear marks and PORK.
3.) Lower taxes result in more tax revenue due to increased economic activity - keep tax rates "liveable" for American families. (Research the JFK, Reagan and Bush models of increased tax revenues due to lowered rates.)
Must run....later....
October 25th, 2006 at 12:56 pm******It is possible the next administration will choose to raise taxes to address the deficit. A more efficient method to address the problem:
1.) Impose term limits on Congress - incumbants from BOTH Parties love to go home and brag how much bacon they’ve “brought homeâ€.
2.) End ear marks and PORK.
3.) Lower taxes result in more tax revenue due to increased economic activity - keep tax rates “liveable†for American families. (Research the JFK, Reagan and Bush models of increased tax revenues due to lowered rates.)
Wow Mighty,
I admit I agree with you on this.
October 25th, 2006 at 1:02 pmThere's just no polishing some turds.
October 25th, 2006 at 1:20 pm#24
Who do you trust to "protect" the American people? It should be not a single person or a leader(or ruler?). It is Democracy, Liberty society. Bush sounds like anti-democracy, and I 'm not surprised many "slave-mind" ppl applaud for that. They should live in totalitarian society where always have a BIG BOSS protect them.
October 25th, 2006 at 1:45 pm#35 - "Research the JFK, Reagan and Bush models of increased tax revenues due to lowered rates." If that were completely true, then why not make all taxes 0.00001% and get 99.99999% more revenue, right?!?!? Nope, it only works to a degree, at which point lower taxes mean lower revenue.
Actually, it might be better to research the Pres. Clinton method of increasing revenues, normalizing taxes and decreasing spending to create the ONLY US BUDGET SURPLUS IN THE PAST 37 YEARS!!!!
Then Pres. Bush comes into office, increases spending like a crack-whore with a stolen credit card, be the ONLY PRESIDENT TO CUT TAXES DURING A WAR, and create the largest deficit in history.
Sorry, sweetie, when it comes to fiscal responsibility, Republicans gave up that distinction in the 80's when they said "deficits are good!". Republicans are now the "borrow and squander" party, hands down.
October 25th, 2006 at 1:51 pmDear dlet - You really have to admire those Iranians and North Koreans, WHEW!! To get SO much done in 5 short years!!!
Comment by mighty+aphrodite
Ok. First it took a lot longer than 5 years. The Koreans had a program in the Reagan years and had bomb material in Bush the Elder's time. They never detonated a bomb until Bush the Stupid named them part of an Axis of Evil.
The Iranians were aided to build the reactor by guess who:
By 1975 U.S. Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, had signed National Security Decision Memorandum 292, titled "U.S.-Iran Nuclear Co-operation," which laid out the details of the sale of nuclear energy equipment to Iran projected to bring U.S. corporations more than $6 billion in revenue.
Until the change of administration in 1977, Dick Cheney, U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz, some of the strongest opponents of Iran's nuclear programme today, were all heavily involved in promoting an Iranian nuclear programme that could extract plutonium from nuclear reactor fuel for use in nuclear weapons.[5] In fairness, it must be noted that Iran was an ally of the United States at the time.
But heh, if blaming Clinton helps gets you up in the morning then who am I to say.
As for Reid please post what the heck you keep cackling about.
October 25th, 2006 at 1:54 pmThere once was a troll named Aphrodite
October 25th, 2006 at 2:07 pmWho claimed to be oh, so Mighty
But when she argued her case
She fell on her face
For her facts were pulled from the rear of her nightie
For Truth - It is refreshing to find common ground. I appreciate the fact that you don't jump into the "quicksand of the ridiculous" and say "Zero taxes must mean infinite revenue" - that is plain stupid. I am slow coming to the term limits table - but I am now convinced that those legislators not permanently ensconced in Washington are able to get more done with less entanglements. The Founding Fathers did not see the Congress as a career - they saw it as public service.
And for those skeptics who question the math, they might receive a bit of enlightenment in this years fiscal numbers. The projected deficit is less than anticipated.
During the argument which took place after the tax revenues increased significantly following the Reagan tax cut, many on the Left never acknowleged the revenue increases - instead they rightfully discussed enormous spending increases. (Interestingly, they never claimed any credit for those increases, preferring to discuss the increse in military spending singularly.
Dlet - Last week, I heard Harry Reid asked what constituted the "Middle Class" by a television journalist. He would not, or could not answer. I'm trying to find out his definition of "Middle Class".
October 25th, 2006 at 2:51 pmMA 1) You choose to ignore government reports that pretty much put to bed the myth that lower tax revenues pay for themselves, they do not. Never have never will. The first honest discussion I heard in this area was in my MBA economics class, and the instructor was a proclaimed conservative. Perhaps I should have sued the school for its presenting me with professors with such conservative biases. Yes he actually told the class that is the position he was working from. Hmm, guess that knife cuts both ways. 2) You also ignore the fact that every year of this administration they project bad numbers and every year when they present the budget the numbers are better so they proclaim things are working. Interesting pattern there. Of course every year they ask for another $100 billion or so outside the budget for their favorite pork project - Iraq.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:01 pm#39 -*********Dear Sweet Dem Sold - This may be hard for an ideologue to hear BUT my only complaints re: Clinton and the economy were the tax hikes on Social Security and the tax hikes on the Middle Class - which broke a campaign promise. His reduced spending was through attrition and I agree with that. You failed to note that he was the beneficiary of an up-swing in the business cycle, but I'm certain you were simply pressed for time - as I am now....
October 25th, 2006 at 3:06 pmstupid is as stupid does.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:24 pm"People that HAVE to work for a living, but can afford both necessities and some amenities." - -
*******Quit dancing on the head of a pin - HOW MUCH $*income*$ do Progs and Harry say constitute the income of the "Middle Class"? When you get up off the floor, just post a dollar and cents number.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:46 pmHere are two reports on staying the course in Iraq.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/video/page/0,,1927660,00.html
Slave labor building the U.S. Vatican Embassy in Bagdad.
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=14173
Thanks to The Angry Arab.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:07 pmWhat a nightmare. Maybe Bush can get Peace with Honor out of the closet or wherever it's been hiding, brush it off, and see if anyone salutes. After all, compared to Iraq, getting out of 'Nam was a breeze. In those days, Peace with Honor did the heavy lifting for Stay the Course.When last seen, it was standing in line to catch a helicopter from the roof of the U.S. embassy and hightail it out of there. It was never seen again.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:15 pmI'm very glad this news makes all of you liberals happy...very sad!
October 25th, 2006 at 7:42 pmI'm very glad this news makes all of you liberals happy...very sad!
October 25th, 2006 at 7:42 pmNice Iraq Video,,,,,,at one point one of our guys says "if I get fired at from here one more time I'm coming back for you" , he's talking to one of the trained Iraq police.
October 25th, 2006 at 8:33 pm#53 I can't get links to work....
October 25th, 2006 at 8:35 pm#58 & #59 This is the link buy I can't get it to act like a link ...
http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid281953791/bctid281861116
October 25th, 2006 at 8:36 pmWhat is the number Harry had in mind? Your non-response is confirming what I have thought for a long time - you don't know squat......
October 25th, 2006 at 9:31 pmSo there is an Inferno here and if the US is lucky a Purgatorio but clearly no Paradisio. This is really terrifying. GW is the neo-con Vergil. Admittedly Bush has delivered a superior Inferno.
October 26th, 2006 at 12:15 am66. The Iraqi debacle is sure a poor way to assist Israel. The neo-cons are for all practical purposes enemies of Israel.
October 26th, 2006 at 1:57 amHi! Very nice site! Thanks you very much! n4d8UxEGOvn
January 12th, 2007 at 1:25 am