Fighting back against the loser lobby

NY Times:

...

Beginning on Tuesday, when Congress returns from its August recess, lawmakers are prepared to debate what to do in Iraq in daily hearings that will culminate on Sept. 10 and Sept. 11 with appearances by the ambassador to Iraq, Ryan C. Crocker, and the military commander there, Gen. David H. Petraeus.

Congress has mandated a progress report from the White House before Sept. 15, and Mr. Bush chided lawmakers for calling for a change in policy before hearing the views of the two men who are, as administration officials repeatedly point out, “on the ground in Iraq.”

“Congress asked for this assessment,” Mr. Bush said in the statement, “and members of Congress should withhold judgment until they have heard it.”

That has not stopped Mr. Bush from making an impassioned defense of the increase in American troops that he ordered in January, making the judgment that the new strategy was working and deserved a chance to continue doing so. In recent speeches, Mr. Bush has highlighted what he and others have called an improvement in security in Iraq and signs of political compromise that have so far been absent among Iraq’s political leaders.

Other reports — including a National Intelligence Estimate released last week, an early draft of a Government Accountability Office study, and a grim assessment of the Iraqi national police by a commission established by Congress — have tempered some of Mr. Bush’s claims, setting the stage for a furious debate with lawmakers in September.

“What we’re hearing is a pretty consistent message of failure on the political front in Iraq,” said Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, a Democrat, who visited Iraq in August.

...

On Friday, Mr. Durbin expressed hope that more Republicans would join in forcing the president to begin withdrawing American forces from Iraq.

The cacophony of reports has done little to unify lawmakers, giving each side of the debate evidence to support their arguments. “All these reports will almost cancel each other out,” said Lawrence J. Korb, a former Reagan administration defense official, who published a recommendation for a withdrawal for the Center for American Progress.

An administration official said Mr. Bush would present his Congressionally mandated report only after Mr. Crocker and General Petraeus appeared on Capitol Hill. All indications, however, suggest that the president has settled on maintaining a sizable commitment of American forces in Iraq well into next year, with only a gradual reduction of troops from the current levels.

At the Pentagon, officials said Mr. Bush’s meeting with the Joint Chiefs of Staff — Gen. George W. Casey Jr. of the Army, Adm. Michael G. Mullen of the Navy, Gen. T. Michael Moseley of the Air Force, and Gen. James T. Conway of the Marine Corps — was part of a process to air a variety of views, including those favoring a faster or deeper reduction than the commanders in the field think is appropriate.

...

Pentagon officials have said publicly that the goal of Mr. Bush’s meetings on Iraq strategy was not necessarily to produce a consensus among Mr. Bush’s military advisers, an unusual depiction of a process in which disagreements are normally shielded from public view.

Rather, the officials said, the goal was to ensure that Mr. Bush was hearing a diversity of views. It may become difficult, however, for the White House to avoid acknowledging that there are growing differences between officers in Washington and in Iraq.

The administration has made an aggressive effort to hold on to Republicans who returned to their constituencies this month at a time of rising antiwar sentiment. The White House scheduled conference calls for lawmakers with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Aug. 14 and with Under Secretary of Defense Eric Edelman this past Tuesday.

Democrats balked at participating in the briefing with Mr. Edelman, who in July caused a furor when he rebuffed a request from Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton to see Pentagon contingency plans for withdrawing from Iraq by accusing her of assisting enemy propaganda.

...

Edelman correctly scolded Hillary Clinton for wanting a timetable for retreat which would have aided the enemy in Iraq. Democrats are so desperate for defeat they are willing to give the enemy a timetable for the defeat they desire. Winning the war will be a big problem for Democrats and they are now using the troop draw down as yet another reason to lose. Any excuse to lose is good enough for today's Democrat leaders like Durbin and Reid.

The fact is that the commanders in Iraq are much closer to troop morale issues than generals and especially Democrats in Washington. Gen. Petraeus is out with these troops everyday and he is attuned to what they are doing. He will have his own recommendations on troop reductions when and if they are timely. You can tell what is wrong with Democrat leadership when they are worried about the commanders report of good news.