More bad news for the Democrats- and good news for America

The United States and Iraq are on the verge of negotiations contemplating an end to the Allied occupation of Iraq by the end of George W. Bush's presidency.

An end to the fighting in Iraq on terms other than surrender and in accordance with such a timetable seems plausible, says Bush war czar Lt. Gen. David Lute, both due to the success of the recent surge, which- as vastly underreported by the mainstream media- has drastically slashed both American and Iraqi casualties, and because the Iraqi government has vastly improved its own capacity for taking over the brunt of the burden of dealing with internal division and unrest.

Contemplated is a reduction of the American forces in Iraq from the present levels of 164,000 troops to a permanent garrison of some 50,000, operating in a support role.

Gen. Lute foresees an end to hostilities by the end of 2008, effectively eliminating Iraq as an issue in the presidential campaign. The Democrats will be deprived of their most powerful issue- and probably have to go into the campaign with Hillary Clinton as their very vulnerable, divisive, and unpopular nominee.

George W. Bush will be old news.

Comments

Jeff D said…
The United States and Iraq are on the verge of negotiations contemplating an end to the Allied occupation of Iraq by the end of George W. Bush's presidency.

You had me going there for a second. Bob Waters thinks a quick end to the Iraqi occupation is good for America???

Not quite. Why are 50,000 permanent troops required to not occupy Iraq?
Bob Waters thinks the sooner victory comes in Iraq, the better. And we're apparently on the verge of it.

50,000 permanent troops are required to help the Iraqis themselves deal with the bad people Ron Paul would allow to have their own way in the absurdly unlikely case that he would be elected.

Sorry, Jeff. Your candidate is not only a flake, but an irrelevant flake where Iraq is concerned.