So what exactly did the Iraq Study Group report? Seems to be whatever anybody wanted to hear, they heard. Here's the New York Times version. I liked this:
The findings left Washington awash in speculation over whether Mr. Bush would embark on a huge policy reversal. To do so would mark an admission that three and a half years of strategy had failed, and that his repeated assurances that “absolutely, we’re winning” were based more on optimism than realism.But then they concede this:
Mr. Bush can easily accept some of the findings, including a call for a fivefold increase in American trainers working alongside Iraqi forces.My verdict: the Iraq Study Group was just a cynical ploy to get Bush through the mid-term elections.
Bush was under growing pressure to Do Something About Iraq, but he was (and remains) determined not to change course. So his enablers set up this group with promises of unspecified change... after the elections. And now, as Murtha says, the ISG recommendations are "no different than the current policy". Surprised? You shouldn't be!
If you accept that the ISG was a farce, you have to acknowledge that Bush and his enablers still have their eyes on the prize: oil. Nothing has changed, they are just stalling for time.
PS: Oh, yes, and we are going to start yet another Israel-Palestine Path To Peace or something. The public love that. And it plays so well for a Lame Duck seeking a "legacy".