Key Recommendations Of The Iraq Study Group
Key Recommendations Of The Iraq Study Group
The Iraq Study Group report is 125 pages long and contains 79 recommendations. Some key points:
RECOMMENDATION 22: The President should state that the United States does not seek permanent military bases in Iraq. If the Iraqi government were to request a temporary base or bases, then the U.S. government could consider that request as it would in the case of any other government.
RECOMMENDATION 35: The United States must make active efforts to engage all parties in Iraq, with the exception of al Qaeda. The United States must find a way to talk to Grand Ayatollah Sistani, Moqtada al-Sadr, and militia and insur-
gent leaders.RECOMMENDATION 40: The United States should not make an open-ended commitment to keep large numbers of American troops deployed in Iraq.
RECOMMENDATION 41: The United States must make it clear to the Iraqi government that the United States could carry out its plans, including planned redeployments, even if Iraq does not implement its planned changes. America’s
other security needs and the future of our military cannot be made hostage to the actions or inactions of the Iraqi government.
RECOMMENDATION 64: U.S. economic assistance should be increased to a level of $5 billion per year rather than being permitted to decline. The President needs to ask for the necessary resources and must work hard to win the support of Congress. Capacity building and job creation, including reliance on the Commander’s Emergency Response Program, should be U.S. priorities. Economic assistance should be provided on a nonsectarian basis.
RECOMMENDATION 72: Costs for the war in Iraq should be included in the President’s annual budget request, starting in FY 2008: the war is in its fourth year, and the normal budget process should not be circumvented. Funding requests for the war in Iraq should be presented clearly to Congress and the American people. Congress must carry out its constitutional responsibility to review budget requests for the war in Iraq carefully and to conduct oversight.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
What’s Texan for “no duh”?
December 6th, 2006 at 11:18 amhmmmmm…? whaddaya think…? will 22 and 40 be implemented…? i think the answer is clear… no way in hell… i also think it’s tremendously disingenuous to think that the u.s. is at the mercy of the iraqis REQUESTING bases or troop commitments when it’s patently clear that the u.s. is, essentially, IMPOSING those bases and those troop commitments…
And, yes, I DO take it personally
December 6th, 2006 at 11:25 ampoor lil’ bush, getting spanked by daddy’s friends
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYeJEFa-xCA
December 6th, 2006 at 11:26 amRECOMMENDATION 22: The President should state that the United States does not seek permanent military bases in Iraq…
“should” … but the whole world knows this preznit LIES, and the lie is obvious and THE SIZE OF THE VATICAN CITY!
December 6th, 2006 at 11:27 am…
don’t kid yourself for a moment about this illustrious ISG report – this is another “con job” on the american people….these guys are master illusionists – slight of hand tricksters….and it only makes negative comments to assuage the uproar of the public as evidenced by the results of the mid term elections. This is simply another “tool” or “ploy” to protract our military presence there! If it walks like a duck…..you got the picture. Trust nothing to do with Pappy’s group of prune faced has beens….they’ve been called into action for a purpose and it has little or nothing to do with the mandate of the american people to disengage in Iraq. Be suspicious…be very suspicious; that is, if one is to be grounded in reality these days.
December 6th, 2006 at 11:30 amShould also say Compensate for melicious deaths and rape victims and also pay for all damages to property for an illegal invasion
Also pick up the depleted Uranium and ship it back to texas and release it ..
December 6th, 2006 at 11:30 amRECOMMENDATION 72: Costs for the war in Iraq should be included in the President’s annual budget request, starting in FY 2008: …
oh yea… why not… it was always the plan for the next guy to clean it up… now we all get to know what our share will be too…
but it ’should’ be now, ‘07… so the voters know what to expect in 08…
December 6th, 2006 at 11:30 am.
Aren’t we all getting tired of being “should” upon? The word “should” is purposely utilized so that it gives el jefe plenty of wiggle room. Check out the language for the real hints…
December 6th, 2006 at 11:31 amThe ISG report is another piece of “toilet paper” to wipe everyone’s butts with! It’s nothing more than a political stall tactic.
December 6th, 2006 at 11:32 amBush will not make any substantial changes in response to the report. Doing so would run counter to everything the decider-in-chief imagines himself to stand for.
December 6th, 2006 at 11:32 amSo far, what I’m hearing from Gates and from this group at least is in the realm of reality that I recognize. At this point I am grateful for any steps in the right direction, whether or not I agree with everything. Just a straightforward recognition of the nature of the mess that’s been created by the PNAC folks is refreshing and encouraging.
December 6th, 2006 at 11:33 amThe statement of the day was * on NPR saying that he hopes congress will pay close attention to the report and carefully evaluate the recommendations. CONGRESS??? Bozo that report tells you what to do. Let’s not blame the Democratic congress.
December 6th, 2006 at 11:35 amWhy does the Iraq Study Group hate freedom so much?
December 6th, 2006 at 11:36 amEarly reports show Bush giving this some thought for at least 4 seconds.
December 6th, 2006 at 11:38 amHe then said, ‘I’ve given this report a lot of thought, and have decided to do what I think is best for Iraq.’
RECOMMENDATION 35: The United States must make active efforts to engage all parties in Iraq, with the exception of al Qaeda. The United States must find a way to talk to Grand Ayatollah Sistani, Moqtada al-Sadr, and militia and insurgent leaders.
The Iraq Study group faces the facts. Democracy in Iraq is a pipe dream
December 6th, 2006 at 11:38 amWhy not talk to al Qaeda?What are they afraid of,that the truth might come out about Bin Laden and Hussien?
December 6th, 2006 at 11:48 amThem is a lot of really nice recommendations. Preznit Bush Jr. will reply with a recommendation of his own.
“Thanks fellers, but we’s gonna do it my way. Piss off.”
Then, thousands of years from now when our troops finally accomplishes they mission, the historians of that time can look back and congratulate Preznit Bush Jr. for his foresight and stay-the-courseiveness.
God bless ‘im!
December 6th, 2006 at 11:53 amThe problem with President Bush is that he will jump all over recommendations like #41 without implementing the other recommendations that define the scope and duration of commitment or communicate the necessary messages to enemies and allies.
December 6th, 2006 at 11:55 amKey Recommendations Of The Iraq Study Group
(The damage control arm of the machine)
“First 100 Days”
1.Impeach George Bush
December 6th, 2006 at 11:58 am2.Impeach Dick Cheney
3.Install Nancy Pelosi as “interim president”
4.Bring troops home immediately.
5.Vote Democratic in the fall of 2008
6.Live happily ever after
None of these recommendations will be implemented, because in Bush World it actually is all about George W. Bush.
December 6th, 2006 at 12:03 pmOh I see… in other words we should be doing just the opposite of what the Bush Admin has been doing all these years.
December 6th, 2006 at 12:04 pm# 5 veritas. Well said. These guys may well be trying to stem the rage of the little folk ( Their view of the American people) by giving fake “voice” to their rage. They think our rage is impotent if they can frame it.
Problem for them is…..it isn’t impotent and they are wrong. Big change is coming.
December 6th, 2006 at 12:05 pmThere is really not much in there. It allows Bush another year to keep Iraq off the books. I frankly hope the new Congress rejects this proposal.
Bluntly, this is not a “get-er-done” roadmap. Yes, it does nudge at the corners, but that is about all it does. I find it a huge disappointment.
December 6th, 2006 at 12:06 pmNow george has the study in his hands. We all know that ultimately he is going to do whatever he wants regardless of what is in the report. My bet is that he will announce that his adminsitration has carefully studied the plan annd upon further review taking the nations bests interests into account we will sta in Iraq until victory is achieved. And of course therte will be the obligatory 911/AlQeuda/Iraq/Central Front references.
Lets start a pool on how long it takes them to reject the report. I say this Friday 4:30pm..
December 6th, 2006 at 12:08 pmBush will pick and choose points
December 6th, 2006 at 12:08 pmthat best serve his agenda. One
comment that stood out “more American
troops should be embedded with
Iraqi forces.” That American troops
should be in “front”. So the Iraqi’s will
have our backs? Dream on.
# 5 veritas. Well said. These guys may well be trying to stem the rage of the little folk ( Their view of the American people) by giving fake “voice†to their rage. They think our rage is impotent if they can frame it.
Problem for them is…..it isn’t impotent and they are wrong. Big change is coming.
Comment by s — December 6, 2006 @ 12:05 pm
warren commisioin report
wmd report
911 report
Al Queda report
smoke and mirrors…………front to back
December 6th, 2006 at 12:15 pmMany of the panel’s findings correlate with public opinion. Generally speaking, the public consistently favors diplomacy over force in foreign affairs. According to our Foreign Policy Index, 61% of Americans favor more emphasis on diplomatic and economic methods when it comes to fighting terrorism. Go to http://www.publicagenda.org/issues/major_proposals_detail.cfm?issue_type=americas_global_role&list=2 for more information.
December 6th, 2006 at 12:20 pmAnybody can make recommendations. What’s important is—are they intelligent and well reasoned and will they be implemented.
I don’t know the answer to the first and I expect that the answer to the second is “no”. Bush does whatever he wants, and has shown no indication of ever doing otherwise.
December 6th, 2006 at 12:24 pmBLABLABLABLABLABLA…
December 6th, 2006 at 12:56 pmWhat a waste of tax payer’s hard earned money.
I side with #19. End of story.
[...] Read more about the ISG’s recommendations here and here. As I said below, don’t expect this to have any direct impact on the Bush admin. Rather Baker’s group has made cool the kind of talk that once drove war boosters like Jean Schmidt to call you a coward and a traitor. [...]
December 6th, 2006 at 1:02 pmTitanic = Iceberg
December 6th, 2006 at 1:08 pmUSA = Iraq
This ship is sinking.
I can see how our ‘Captain’ will leave his passengers to get sucked into death.
The copy that G.Dubious received had a special edition cover which read:
December 6th, 2006 at 1:09 pm“My Pet Study”
It was also illustrated, ’cause everyone knew he would not read it, only look at the pictures……….
These guys may well be trying to stem the rage of the little folk ( Their view of the American people)
Comment by s — December 6, 2006 @ 12:05 pm
oh, it’s worse than that:
December 6th, 2006 at 1:36 pm“the MYTHICAL little people” – john cornyn, r-tx (google it)
At least this has a nicer looking cover than the Strategy for Victory in Iraq PR campaign. I really like the color scheme. Other than that, this is a bunch of progressive ideas rolled into a bi-partisan docudrama.
December 6th, 2006 at 1:59 pmEngaging with all Parties would mean having to conceed legitimacy to the various religious/political groups in Iraq. Thus far, the brain-dead neocons have be calling anyone who is fighting against the U.S. a terrorist. That’s why they don’t want to call it a civil war. To do so would mean that two (or more) legitimate groups are fighting. Bushco can’t admit that, because he has to keep it simple so the sheep can understand – i.e. there’s good Iraqi’s and there’s terrists. Nothin’ in between.
Call me a naysayer, but I don’t see Bush doing anything with recommendation number 35. His head is too far up his ignorant, arrogant a$$.
December 6th, 2006 at 2:07 pmI know everyone is eagerly awaiting the issuance of the Larry from C Iraq Study Group. So without further delay…
1. Leave Iraq TODAY. There’s nothing to be gained from staying one more day.
1a. Tear down all “permanent” military bases.
2. Cut the Iraqis a check for $100 Billion and let them reconstruct their country in whatever manner they choose. It’ll put Iraqis to work which may put a dent in the fighting/violence.
3. Make the war profiteering companies give back all their ill-gotten gains and distribute them to the troops.
4. Impeach Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld. Televise every minute of every trial free for the whole world to see. We might just get our credibility back if we show the world the United States is once again a nation of laws.
December 6th, 2006 at 2:11 pmAnybody else noticed that this is definitely not the first draft of this document. A lot of people have to have already seen this. It has been edited for content and is formatted for printing.
December 6th, 2006 at 2:30 pmThe Perrspectives Iraq Document Library has been updated to include the findings of the Iraq Study Group. The document repository includes the ISG’s final report as well as its executive summary.
The Perrspectives Iraq Document Library also provides one-stop access to all the essential documents surrounding the Iraq war, pre-war intelligence and the hunt for weapons of mass destruction. This includes the WMD findings of the Iraq Survey Group, as well as the report of the Robb-Silbermann Commission. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Phase I and Phase II reports on the uses – and misuses – of pre-war intelligence are also featured. Among other key materials are the Downing Street Memos, Colin Powell’s 2003 presentation to the United Nations and President Bush’s 2003 State of the Union Address.
Visit the Perrspectives Iraq Document Library here.
December 6th, 2006 at 2:35 pmWhile we waited with baited breath for the Baker-Hamilton report the killings in Iraq continue.
The last four months are the only four month period where 65 or more Americans have been killed.
The last three months are the only three month period where 70 or more Americans have been killed.
Now today we learn that 10 more Americans have been killed.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16075920/
This complete lack of urgency waiting for a report that only offered guidelines is apalling. Another 100 Americans had died (post election) while the Bush administration twiddles its thumbs. Procrastination is not a policy.
December 6th, 2006 at 3:21 pmThats all they’ve come up with over all these months? Stating what everyone but Bush and the neocon morons knew already. Wow. What an incredible waste of time. Did these assclowns get paid for this?
December 6th, 2006 at 3:51 pmThe media and Democrats have gone out of their way to define Iraq as a failure. Fact is we won in the battle with Iraq. Now we are fighting a war on terror.
“Mission Accomplished”
What we have here right now is a humanitarian effort for the benefit of the Iraqi people. The fact is being hidden that the other oil producing countries are strategically opposed to Iraqi competition on the oil market as a democracy. You have to look at motive them simply consider that a democratic Iraq is a threat to the current status quo. And don’t give this bologna about Iran being a democracy either.
Once you have established that simple fact it becomes obvious considering that Iran and Syria are assisting the Mahidi army that they are indeed on the side of evil.
The problem is the Democrats have been given total freedom to play armchair quarter back with impunity by the media. They are the spoilers in the War against Terrorism” once again look at who benefits and you have motive. The problem is with this strategy we all loose. I disagree with Bush caving in to their game in hopes that he will gain an ally in the war instead they will only take the knife that they have imbedded into Bush’s back and twist and slash for better effect.
The only way to level the playing field is if the media properly informs the public a properly informed public will do the right thing. This idea of posturing for a Vietnam scenario in order to wreak the benefit of preaching a false story of failure instead of the real story of betrayal does no one any good.
Consider this if we only went after Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Our troops get hit with WMD’s Shall I remind you of the 50 or so quotes by high level Democrats touting the thread that Saddam poses to National security? These going back into the 90’s? If it had happened we would sure be hearing about how Bush screwed up by not covering our flank side and addressing the Iraq problem.
When the world can see that Iraq is a problem that deserves to be looked at as a humanitarian issue and sees the true picture of what the problem is. Instead of a Bush vs. the world and the Democrats on the side of the world issue as it has been framed. There never will be a good ending to this story.
December 6th, 2006 at 5:48 pmBush will not implement a single one of their recommendations.
December 6th, 2006 at 5:50 pmTell ya what this is, it’s just a goddamn piece of paper!
December 6th, 2006 at 5:54 pmNow Get The F*ck Out Of MY OFFICE!!!!
…Here…
…here’s some more sh*t for you to eat…
…this time wrapped in corn tortillas…
…with a little feta cheese for odoriforousness…
…How do you like us now?
December 6th, 2006 at 5:54 pm#41, Joe, did you just get back from a 4 year vacation on Mars? What the hell are you talking about? You call our invasion of Iraq a benefit to the Iraqi people? Wow, I don’t even know where to start with that rambling mess of a post. There was no Iraq problem, no WMD’s, nothing! Get a grip dude.
December 6th, 2006 at 6:09 pmMikey your an idiot but I’m sure you feel content in knowing that you are one of many.
December 6th, 2006 at 6:11 pmCut the crap, Bush.
December 6th, 2006 at 6:51 pmI’m not following Joe’s logic. We have replaced the contained Saddam threat with uncontained chaos. What mission did we accomplish, exactly, and how does this help the war on terror?
December 6th, 2006 at 10:30 pm[...] Think Progress highlighted four recommendations from the recently released Iraq Study Group Report: RECOMMENDATION 22: The President should state that the United States does not seek permanent military bases in Iraq. If the Iraqi government were to request a temporary base or bases, then the U.S. government could consider that request as it would in the case of any other government. [...]
December 6th, 2006 at 10:32 pm[...] New Mexico For Sale thinks that I (along with and other, unspecified liberals) am jumping on the realism bandwagon because I and Think Progress highlighted four Iraq Study Group recommendations this morning: How strange, how unexpected, to see liberals now embracing that school of foreign policy known as “realism,†given that throughout the Cold War they hated but hated it. Who’d a thunk, during those Cold War years when liberals chastised America for backing dictators, that liberals would someday come around and support none other than James Baker himself? Times are a-changin’. [...]
December 6th, 2006 at 10:38 pmThere’s a big difference between thinking that Baker is right on current Iraq policy and thinking that, for example, knocking over democratically-elected governments and installing thugs is just neato.
December 6th, 2006 at 10:44 pmJoeslogic is on crack, plain and simple…
December 6th, 2006 at 11:30 pmok TP
now that you yourself have CHERRYPICKED what you would like shown.
How about posting the WHOLE report this time.
Talk about cherrypicked intelligence.
zing!
December 6th, 2006 at 11:38 pmI love it when the opposing view degrades to the use of sophomoric and baseless insults. It’s all that I need to feel vindicated in my view basically proof that I am right.
December 6th, 2006 at 11:42 pmJoe’s Lethargic mind????
Come on Neocon warmonger. Are you Wolfowitz? Nobody is buying your kind of crappy logic nowadays….maybe 4 years ago, but not now.
Go crawl back into your cave; we’ll let you know when the war is over so you can get onto a topic you may know something about.
December 7th, 2006 at 12:27 amPlease stay in iraq, please stay.. please stay… please stay… please stay..!!!!!!
The longer you stay there the more freedom the rest of the world (sorry Iraqis!) has from your military —
You’ve invaded or bombed over 30 countries since the end of WWII.
December 7th, 2006 at 5:45 amOne of the points brought up in the report is the lack of Us government and military personnel competent in Arabic. For example, the US Embassy in Bagdhad has 1,000 employees, only 33 of whom can speak Arabic and a paltry six who are actually fluent.
December 7th, 2006 at 6:01 amNot to toot my own horn, but I’ve pointed out the lack of Arabic speakers in the military, intelligence agencies, etc. several times on previous threads; I remember trolls like Tracy even questioning why I was “harping on the issue so much.” This Iraq War has now gone on longer than World War II, yet the Bush administration still hasn’t gotten around to training intelligence agents, military personnel, etc. to be competent in Arabic and the languages spoken in Afghanistan. By contrast, shortly after the attack on Pearl Harbor, the Franklin Roosevelt administration, acutely aware of the need for linguists, set up intensive training, mostly on military bases, in Japanese–a language, which, like Arabic, is difficult and uses a different script. Nevertheless, some of the young men picked to be linguists learned Japanese well enough not only to translate normal communications but also to break military codes.
This is just one of the several aspects in which the Bush administration’s planning has been inexcusably shoddy, shoddy, and shoddy.
Good point 57. Too bad these idiots think all thier problems can be solved with bombs and expensive fighter planes.
We all know the enemy, species terrorus invisibulus is a jabbering incomphrehesible alien/beast, why should we try to talk, or even understand them? We don’t know anything about thier culture, their language.. but we do they know one thing.. they stand for everything we dont stand for…and one other thing..they told me you all are stupid!
December 7th, 2006 at 8:13 amRecommendation 63: privatize the oil industry. Now that is something Bush/Cheney can get behind.
December 7th, 2006 at 4:50 pmDoes it bother anybody else that there wasn’t a single retired General among the key panelists, and only two members who rose above the rank of 1st Lt? Baker himself only spent 2 years of active military service and now he runs the Dept of Defense. Maybe if we had politicians who spent more time in the military, they could use the military as something more than a tool for re-election.
December 8th, 2006 at 5:45 amThank you for the opportunity you have provided. I am a christian, and therefore much of what I have stated has biblical links. I believe that no human or group on earth has total, absolutely accurate information to justify a massive military attack on any other country, which will essentially result in unaccounted civilian deaths. Even if an unidentified group causes civilan deaths in our own country. Under these circumstances only a thorough negotiated response maybe considered after engaging all parties concerned to arrive at a commonly decided plan of action. Of course what this essentially means is to establish a common meeting ground where problems are tabled and resolved before any preemptive action is taken. I believe the effective establishment of such a process, will be the first small step for mankind……….
January 8th, 2007 at 11:28 pm