This morning, I read articles about the Pentagon's latest report on Iraq in The Washington Post, The New York Times and the Associated Press. That report paints a very bleak picture. Yet, there's not one word of comment from Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Condi or any major player in the Bush Administration. They've all been talking a lot about Iraq lately, so why won't they talk now about the Pentagon's assessment of the situation? It sure interferes with their current speech-a-thon.
In a separate article, the NY Times actually wondered about the fate of one of Bush's last p.r. stunts, “National Strategy for Victory in Iraq" which was issued last November:
Missing from Mr. Bush’s latest speeches, at least so far, is detail about the progress of his previous plan, the “Strategy for Victory” of November, billed as the product of a review and rethinking of what had worked and what had failed.Because they don't want to look bad, the Bush team isn't doing anything -- except campaigning.
One of its most notable features was Mr. Bush’s willingness to acknowledge past errors, from failing to anticipate the rise of the insurgency to focusing the early reconstruction effort on big infrastructure projects, which will take years to deliver benefits to the Iraqi people, if they are completed at all.
The Pentagon’s latest report to Congress about progress on that strategy painted a mixed but largely grim picture, especially about the rise of sectarian violence and the failed effort to create an effective Iraqi police force. So why not announce a new change of strategy? A senior official said this week that the president could only talk about a change of strategy so many times, without looking as if he is constantly casting about for solutions.
