Next Year, WTF?

Now I am all for the deliberative process. In fact I think that it should have been employed prior to our disastrous adventure which has created this Mess-O-Potamia.

Okay, so many of us saw this coming and tried to get attention to the impending catastrophe that the invasion of Iraq would unleash.

So, that said, it has now been confirmed that Iraq is “a deteriorating and grave situation” by the Wise Old Men and Woman and what is this administration going to do about it?

Well, Bush is going to seek advice from everyone that he should have been seeking advice from in the first place.

And though our folks are being killed and maimed over there and Iraqis are being killed and maimed and that the whole situation is more than likely FUBAR, according to the Whitehouse there is no sense that there is any panic. According to Tony Snow, “"There's urgency, but not panic," the spokesman said.

So, what does the “Decider” decide to do? Why he has decided to put off the decision until after the Holiday Shopping Season, as was reported by the WAPO today:

Bush to Announce New Iraq Strategy Next Year

By William Branigin and Michael A. Fletcher
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, December 12, 2006; 4:00 PM

President Bush plans to wait until early next year to announce a new strategy for Iraq, dropping his previous goal of addressing the nation before Christmas to stake out a fresh course based on several studies, the White House said today.

[snip]

The extra time was needed to allow advisers to more fully prepare their analysis on the impact of the changes under consideration, White House Press Secretary Tony Snow said later. "He [Bush] decided, frankly, that it's not ready yet," Snow told reporters. He said he could not specify a date when the new strategy would be announced.

[snip]

The delay was disclosed as Bush continued a series of consultations to explore options and hear from civilian and military experts while awaiting the results of Iraq strategy reviews being conducted by the State Department, Pentagon and National Security Council. Last week he received a stinging report from the Iraq Study Group, a bipartisan panel chartered by Congress and headed by former secretary of state James A. Baker III and former congressman Lee H. Hamilton (D-Ind.)

[snip]

Reid, whose party won control of both houses of Congress in the Nov. 7 midterm elections, complained in a statement, "It has been six weeks since the American people demanded change in Iraq. In that time Iraq has descended further toward all-out civil war, and all the president has done is fire Donald Rumsfeld and conduct a listening tour."

Bush "needs to understand how important and urgent change is for Iraq and for our troops," Reid said. "Talking to the same people he should have talked to four years ago does not relieve the president of the need to demonstrate leadership and change his policy now. The ball remains in his court, and time is running out."

[snip]

"He's assigned some tasks to people to work on, and he's got some very clear, practical, tactical and other questions," Snow said. "And so, certainly the process and consultations will continue. And people are going to be working very hard between now and the time that the president has formulated the policy and is prepared to share his thoughts with the public and the world."

"There's urgency, but not panic," the spokesman said.

That is right folks there is “urgency, but not panic!”

Now the cynic in me could say that an announcement that we are going to send in more troops could possibly effect the Holiday Season's economic situation, but I will leave that to the other cynics out there!

Then Snow adds, in order to clarify the situation:

Asked if the delay means that Bush "doesn't know what to do," Snow said, "Well, that would be the wrong inference to draw."

He added, "You would expect and desire the commander in chief, in looking at a situation, to examine military concerns, security concerns, diplomatic concerns, internal political concerns within Iraq, regional ramifications, how you get people to work in concert with one another. It is enormously complex. . . . And so, what the president's doing now is pushing people to try to provide more input and more information and more insight of factual questions, strategic and tactical questions."

Snow said, "This is not not knowing what he wants to do. This is out of an absolute determination to do this right, making sure that he is absolutely convinced that the pieces have been put together, he's gotten the best advice, he's gotten the best facts, and that he now has the policy that he thinks will be the best to move."

Well call me one of those who would expect the “Decider” and “Commander-in-Chief” to be “…looking at a situation, to examine military concerns, security concerns, diplomatic concerns, internal political concerns within Iraq, regional ramifications, how you get people to work in concert with one another.

And as one who knew before this administration lead us to this tragedy that the situation would be “enormously complex. . . . And so, what the president's [should be doing] is pushing people to try to provide more input and more information and more insight of factual questions, strategic and tactical questions."

I am appalled!

It is now over three years since March 20, 2003 and this President is only now doing what should have been done since January 2001 when he came up with this scheme? He is only now doing what he should have been doing everyday since he started “Shock and Awe” in March of 2003?

Is this a PR campaign or is this real?

If this is just another of the Photo-Ops and PR campaigns that this administration does, you know campaigning, not governing, then I understand it. If this is actually real, then this President needs to be removed from office for gross incompetence, delusion and/or negligence (okay all of the above).

How else could this be explained?

And no George, if this is just PR, the folks out here are not going to forget this after Christmas and the Holiday Shopping save the economy season. And if you call for more troops after the First of the New Year, I think there will be calls for “Off With His Head.”

Be forewarned!

Update: The NYT’s apparently is part of those of us who see a conspiracy here:

December 13, 2006

Editorial

Without Deliberate Speed

The claims of calm deliberation emerging from the White House this week are maddening. The search for a new plan for Iraq seems to be taking place with as much urgency as the deliberations over a new color for the dollar bill.

In Baghdad yesterday, a suicide bomber killed at least 70 people, most of them Shiite laborers whose only sin was looking for work. In Washington, meanwhile, President Bush held a series of carefully stage-managed meetings with officials and outside experts whose common credential appeared to be their opposition to the recommendations of James Baker’s Iraq Study Group.

To top it off, White House aides told reporters that — despite earlier promises of a pre-Christmas speech by Mr. Bush — the country now should not expect any announcement of a new strategy until early next year. The president’s spokesman, Tony Snow, said that “it’s a complex business, and there are a lot of things to take into account,” adding that Mr. Bush “wants to make sure it’s done right.”

We are more than eager for this White House to finally get something right on Iraq. But we find it chilling to imagine that Mr. Bush and his advisers have only now begun a full policy review, months after Iraq plunged into civil war and years after experts began warning that the administration’s strategy was not working.

We would like to believe that the reason for delay is that some of Mr. Bush’s advisers have come up with a sensible change in course and they are now trying to persuade the president to take it. Or that behind the scenes Mr. Bush is already strong-arming Iraq’s leaders to rein in the sectarian militias and begin long-delayed national reconciliation talks.

We fear that a more likely explanation is that the president’s ever-divided policy advisers are still wrangling over the most basic decisions, while his political handlers are waiting for public enthusiasm for the Baker report to flag before Mr. Bush tries to explain why he won’t follow through on some of the report’s most important and reasonable suggestions — like imposing a timetable on Iraqi leaders to make political compromises or face a withdrawal of American support. Or trying to persuade Iran and Syria to cease their meddling.

The Baker study, of course, is not the received wisdom of the ages. It should have been released far earlier, rather than being delayed to get past the midterm elections. But it was a good-faith effort by people wise enough and experienced enough to know how bad the situation really is in Iraq, and how little time left there is for the president to act.

Mr. Bush has no more time to waste on “listening tours” and photo ops. The nation is in a crisis, and Americans need to hear how he plans to unwind the chaos he has unleashed in Iraq. If the president is delaying because he is searching for a good option, he can stop. There are none. But Americans need to see that he is prepared to choose among the undesirable alternatives, and clear the way for a withdrawal of American troops that does not leave even more killing and mayhem behind.