A U.S. transport helicopter takes off from Baghdad's Green Zone. (AP/Vadim Ghirda)
by Mark Silva
For some time now, President Bush has refused to talk about any "timelines'' for withdrawal of U.S. military forces from Iraq - vetoing war-spending bills approved by Congress with timelines included and chiding lawmakers for playing generals.
But now the White is ready to talk about timelines - while inserting that long-held caveat that American forces will deploy in accordance with "conditions on the ground" - and in fact is talking about them in very general terms today, following a secure videoconference between Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.
And the White House asserted today that these will not be "arbitrary'' timelines, which is what the president has accused Democratic leaders in Congress of proposing.
Yet even the discussion of a "horizon,'' which is the term included in a statement from the White House today, is likely to figure into the war debate in the presidential campaign underway.
Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the GOP's presumptive nominee, is certain to take this word as sign of the "success'' of the surge in U.S. forces that Bush ordered into Iraq last year and has since largely withdrawn. Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, the Democratic candidate calling for a withdrawal of forces in a 16-month timeframe after his election, is likely to amplify his call for a redeployment of U.S. forces to Afghanistan, where violence has increased - as he embarks this weekend on a tour taking him to both war fronts.
"In the area of security cooperation, the president and the prime minister agreed that improving conditions should allow for the agreements now under negotiation to include a general time horizon for meeting aspirational goals,'' the White House said today of the long-distance meeting that Bush and Maliki held, curiously near the eve of Obama's own voyage. This includes "the resumption of Iraqi security control in their cities and provinces and the further reduction of U.S. combat forces from Iraq.''
White House Press Secretary Dana Perino also was careful to note: "The president and prime minister agreed that the goals would be based on continued improving conditions on the ground and not an arbitrary date for withdrawal.''
The leaders, attempting to negotiate an temporary agreement for future military assistance in Iraq, held what the White House called a "regularly scheduled secure video conference.'' They spoke of "a range of matters including the improving security situation and the performance of Iraqi Security Forces across Iraq.
"They also discussed ongoing initiatives to follow security gains with Iraqi investment in its people, infrastructure, cities, and towns, which will be aided by a $21 billion supplemental budget now before the Iraqi parliament,'' Perino said in a statement released in Arizona, where the president was traveling today.
"In the context of these improving political, economic, and security conditions, the president and the prime minister discussed the ongoing negotiations to establish a normalized bilateral relationship between Iraq and the United States,'' the press secretary said. "The leaders agreed on a common way forward to conclude these negotiations as soon as possible, and noted in particular the progress made toward completing a broad strategic framework agreement that will build on the Declaration of Principles signed last November, and include areas of cooperation across many fields, including economics, diplomacy, health, culture, education, and security.''
They also marked "the return of the final surge brigade to the United States this month, and the ongoing transition from a primary combat role for U.S. forces to an over-watch role, which focuses on training and advising Iraqi forces, and conducting counter-terror operations in support of those forces.''
All of this, the White House maintains, is evidence of the surge's success.
"This transition and the subsequent reduction in U.S. forces from Iraq is a testament to the improving capacity of Iraq's security forces and the success of joint operations that were initiated under the new strategy put in place by the president and the prime minister in January 2007,'' the press secretary said.
• 
• 
• 
• 
Comments
This is the Super_Secret Strategy the GOP is using to try to get McCain elected?
Mmmmm,
You see this is how it goes:
Bush and McCain Flip_flop and adopt Obama's foreign policy
GOP/McCain issue press release desperately trying to link Obama/Bush....HAHAHA!
Then they'll try to muddle the media message saying Obama isn't about change...blah blah blah.
In the end, it's all stupid and none of it works, it's all head fakes, especially with the way that Bush and McCain have actually left more troops in Iraq after the surge than there were before the "surge"...and now they'll declare that they are drawing down troop numbers in Iraq...nothing changes....until President Obama is sworn into office on Jan 20, 2009.
McCain = third term of Bush
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ioy90nF2anI
-
Posted by: John E | July 18, 2008 1:10 PM
Actually with the war winding down could've worked in the democrate's favor. Now that the security is established here in the US and Iraq the election will favor the idea that we can a democrate back in the whitehouse. But the dems shot themselves in the foot with their choice of canidate and will end up losing...again.
Posted by: Michael Bingamon | July 18, 2008 1:43 PM
Now that the security is established here in the US and Iraq the election will favor the idea that we can a democrate back in the whitehouse. But the dems shot themselves in the foot with their choice of canidate and will end up losing...again.
Posted by: Michael Bingamon | July 18, 2008 1:43 PM
You call using US tax payers money to pay Sunni militia members not to shoot at us "establishing security in Iraq"?
HAHAHA!
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEtZlR3zp4c
-
Posted by: John E | July 18, 2008 2:23 PM
Considering that I have several acquaintances who are gearing up for training so that they can go to Iraq in 3 months, I'm not buying into this whole "horizon" thing. Bush would keep us in this war forever if he could.
Posted by: Lynn | July 18, 2008 2:58 PM
JohnE, did you notice that last weekend, Obama's website purged all negative references to the military surge in Iraq ? Why ? Isn't the basis for his campaign crumbling? The war he promised to surrender in may conclude before he flips and flops all the way to the oval office ! Have you noticed that after his flip flops, he now agrees with Bush on 1) gun rights, 2) the death panalty 3) agrees with Bush that "mental distress" should not justify a late-term abortion, 4) faith-based initiatives 5) NAFTA 6) the FISA law, 7) multilateral efforts to fight the Taliban in Afganistan (but Obama will surrender there when Afganistan becomes his Iraq) 8) multilateral diplomacy with N. Korea, 9) the military SURGE in Iraq.... shall I go on ? If we exclude Obama's friendship with racists, and his willingness to surrender when the going gets tough , exactly how does Obama differ from Bush ?
President Obama == President Bush
Posted by: realist | July 18, 2008 3:09 PM
Funny that as we near an election timetables are being discussed - I gues this war was just part of the plan to try an keep a repube in office. To bad thousands had to die and billions wasted as part of this GOP grand plan.
Posted by: rjinchi | July 18, 2008 3:35 PM
Whats this? I thought the mission was accomplished years ago..
Posted by: Ron | July 18, 2008 4:18 PM
Everything is getting weird. Everyone is trying to get an advantage. Reagan and Condileeza Rice were in Europe. She is unfortunately discounted to the Liberal media. Same with the Liberal Media in Canada. Yikes. Comedy Central is owned by CTV Globe and Mail in Toronto. Now the Globe and Mail won't publish my comments. I call that communism liberal style.
Posted by: Kathleen Degelder | July 18, 2008 6:46 PM
Bush and McCain "evolve," while Obama flip-flops. Bush and McCain see a "horizon" in Iraq, while Obama prefers a "timeline." Words are wonderful, are they not?
Posted by: Richard Friedman | July 18, 2008 6:58 PM
Now that Iraq is starting to tell us to get out, Bush has this great idea to start wrapping things up...
Posted by: Jim Cleary | July 18, 2008 7:38 PM
Jon Stewart had it right when he punctured Dana Perino’s bombasticy last night. Get real Bush: if it walks like a timetable and talks like a timetable it’s a timetable.
Posted by: JON WINDY | July 18, 2008 8:12 PM
The only thing on the horizon is Bush and Cheney's shamefull demise. History will record this administration as the worst in this country's history.
Posted by: Rick/Sneads Ferry, NC | July 18, 2008 9:04 PM
Bush is a knucklehead...he's just saying what cheney and rove tell him to say! the man is absolutly clueless.
Posted by: Mr. Wright | July 18, 2008 9:16 PM
Just a couple of comments,
the mission accomplished was to remove Sadam from Power
done !
as for reestablishing Iraq's security
in the course of history,
after the civil war in the US it too a couple of years before the country
was up and running like before the war,
Germany after WWII took several years to get it's government back on track, and there were roadside bombing in Germany for a while after Germany surrendered,
the US still has troups in Germany
how about Korea?
seeing the unstable region in the middle east the progress has actually been good
Posted by: Tic | July 18, 2008 10:00 PM
Bush and McCain "evolve," while Obama flip-flops. Bush and McCain see a "horizon" in Iraq, while Obama prefers a "timeline." Words are wonderful, are they not?
Posted by: Richard Friedman | July 18, 2008 10:32 PM