Chinese Online Class: Chinese Mandarin - Bush takes blame in Iraq, adds troops

WORLD / Middle East

Bush takes blame in Iraq, adds troops

(AP)
Updated: 2007-01-11 10:18

Democratic leaders, from left, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of Md.,
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of Calif., and Senate Majority Leader Harry
Reid of Nev. talk to reporters outside the White House in Washington,
Wednesday, Jan. 10, 2007, following a meeting with President Bush to
discuss his revised Iraq strategy. [AP]

WASHINGTON - US President Bush on Wednesday acknowledged for the first
time he erred by failing to order a military buildup in Iraq last year
and said he was increasing US troops by 21,500 to quell the country's
near-anarchy.

"Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with me," Bush
said.

Special coverage:
Escalating Violence in Iraq

Related readings:
Analysis: Bush speech draws lines
Bush's Iraq plan faces defiant Congress
War-weary Americans weigh new Bush plan
New wave of US troops set for Iraq
Asian allies offer support for Bush
US may send more troops to Iraq
US to remove up to 70,000 troops from Europe, Asia
US sends more troops to Afghanistan
Defense chief reveals US ground forces in Afghan capital

The military increase puts Bush on a collision course with the new
Democratic Congress and pushes the American presence in Iraq toward its
highest level. It also runs counter to widespread anti-war passions among
Americans and the advice of some top generals.

In a prime-time address to the nation, Bush pushed back against the
Democrats' calls to end the unpopular war. He said that "to step back now
would force a collapse of the Iraqi government, tear that country apart
and result in mass killings on an unimaginable scale."

"If we increase our support at this crucial moment and help the Iraqis
break the current cycle of violence, we can hasten the day our troops
begin coming home," he said.

In addition to extra US forces, the plan envisions Iraq committing 10,000
to 12,000 more troops to secure Baghdad's neighborhoods.

Even before Bush's address, the new Democratic leaders of Congress
renewed their opposition to a buildup. "This is the third time we are
going down this path. Two times this has not worked," House Speaker Nancy
Pelosi, D-Calif., said after meeting with the president. "Why are they
doing this now? That question remains."

Senate and House Democrats are arranging votes urging the president not
to send more troops. While lacking the force of law, the measures would
compel Republicans to go on record as either bucking the president or
supporting an escalation.

Usually loath to admit error, Bush said it also was a mistake to have
allowed American forces to be restricted by the Iraqi government, which
tried to prevent US military operations against fighters controlled by
the radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, a powerful political ally of
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. The president said al-Maliki had assured
him that "political or sectarian interference will not be tolerated."

After nearly four years of bloody combat, the speech was perhaps Bush's
last credible chance to try to present a winning strategy in Iraq and
persuade Americans to change their minds about the unpopular war, which
has cost the lives of more than 3,000 members of the US military as well
as more than $400 billion.

Bush's approach amounts to a huge gamble on al-Maliki's willingness - and
ability - to deliver on promises he has consistently failed to keep: to
disband Shiite militias, pursue national reconciliation and make good on
commitments for Iraqi forces to handle security operations in Baghdad.

"Our past efforts to secure Baghdad failed for two principal reasons:
There were not enough Iraqi and American troops to secure neighborhoods
that had been cleared of terrorists and insurgents," the president said.
"And there were too many restrictions on the troops we did have."

He said American commanders have reviewed the Iraqi plan "to ensure that
it addressed these mistakes."

Bush said that under his plan, US forces will work alongside Iraqi units
and be embedded in their formations.

Responding to concerns from US commanders, Bush said American troops will
have a clearly defined mission to help Iraqis clear and secure
neighborhoods, assist in the protection of the local population and "to
help ensure that the Iraqi forces left behind are capable of providing
the security that Baghdad needs."

While Bush is putting the onus on the Iraqis to meet their
responsibilities and commit more troops, Bush did not threaten specific
consequences if they do not. Iraq has missed previous self-imposed
timetables for taking over security responsibilities.

Bush, however, cited the government's latest optimistic estimate. "To
establish its authority, the Iraqi government plans to take
responsibility for security in all of Iraq's provinces by November," the
president said.

Resisting calls for troop reductions, Bush said that "failure in Iraq
would be a disaster for the United States. A democratic Iraq will not be
perfect. But it will be a country that fights terrorists instead of
harboring them."

But Bush warned that the strategy would, in a short term he did not
define, bring more violence rather than less.

"Even if our new strategy works exactly as planned, deadly acts of
violence will continue, and we must expect more Iraqi and American
casualties," he said. "The question is whether our new strategy will
bring us closer to success. I believe that it will."

Bush's warning was echoed by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., a leading
proponent of a troop increase. "Is it going to be a strain on the
military? Absolutely. Casualties are going to go up," the senator said.

Bush said he considered calls from Democrats and some Republicans to pull
back American forces. He concluded it would rip Iraq apart.

"Such a scenario would result in our troops being forced to stay even
longer and confront an enemy that is even more lethal," the president
said. "If we increase our support at this crucial moment and help the
Iraqis break the current cycle of violence, we can hasten the day our
troops begin coming home."

Still, Bush said that "America's commitment is not open-ended. If the
Iraqi government does not follow through on its promises, it will lose
the support of the American people and it will lose the support of the
Iraqi people. Now is the time to act."

The buildup comes two months after elections that were widely seen as a
call for the withdrawal of some or all US forces from Iraq. Polling by
AP-Ipsos in December found that only 27 percent of Americans approved of
Bush's handling of Iraq, his lowest rating yet.

Bush's blueprint would boost the number of US troops in Iraq - now at
132,000 - to 153,500 at a cost of $5.6 billion. The highest number was
160,000 a year ago in a troop buildup for Iraqi elections.

The latest increase calls for sending 17,500 US combat troops to Baghdad.
The first of five brigades will arrive by next Monday. The next would
arrive by Feb. 15 and the reminder would come in 30-day increments.

Bush also committed 4,000 more Marines to Anbar Province, a base of the
Sunni insurgency and foreign al-Qaida fighters.

Bush's plan mirrored earlier moves attempting to give Iraqi forces a
bigger security role. The chief difference appeared to be a recognition
that the Iraqis need more time to take on the full security burden.

Another difference involves doubling the number of US civilian workers
who help coordinate local reconstruction projects. These State
Department-led units - dubbed Provincial Reconstruction Teams - are to
focus on projects both inside and outside the heavily guarded Green Zone,
and some will be merged into combat brigades.

Several Republican senators are candidates for backing the resolution
against a troop increase. Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine,
Gordon Smith of Oregon and Norm Coleman of Minnesota said they oppose
sending more soldiers.

Republican Sens. George Voinovich of Ohio and John Warner of Virginia
also might be persuaded. Warner said he supports the Iraq Study Group
recommendations, which strongly cautioned against an increase in troops
unless advocated by military commanders.

Bush's strategy ignores key recommendations of the Iraq Study Group,
which in December called for a new diplomatic offensive and an outreach
to Syria and Iran.

Chinese Online Class

Monday, March 24, 2008

Chinese Mandarin - Bush takes blame in Iraq, adds troops

No comments:

Sponsor AD

Learning Sites

Labels

Blog Archive