Peter Pace to recommend cutting US force in Iraq in half
Now we know why the White House didn't want a "bruising" Pace reconfirmation hearing. It would be "bruising" for them.
When the yes man (politely referred to in this article as "a consensus builder who is loath to confront civilian leaders on war strategy") comes out against "the surge," the game is over.
(Question: Who leaked this? My first thought was Pace or someone else at the Joint Chiefs, but let's not leave out the possibility that this was an immunizing leak from the White House.
If Pace was planning to drop this on the front page of the NYTimes the day before the Petraeus' testimony, somebody at the White House might have figured an early Friday in the LATimes might be better. This allows time for all the followup articles to be done Saturday.
Just asking.)
The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is expected to advise President Bush to reduce the U.S. force in Iraq next year by almost half, potentially creating a rift with top White House officials and other military commanders over the course of the war.
Administration and military officials say Marine Gen. Peter Pace is likely to convey concerns by the Joint Chiefs that keeping well in excess of 100,000 troops in Iraq through 2008 will severely strain the military....
According to administration and military officials, the Joint Chiefs believe it is of crucial strategic importance to reduce the size of the U.S. force in Iraq in order to bolster the military's ability to respond to other threats, a view that is shared by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates.
Pace is expected to offer his advice privately instead of issuing a formal report.
When the yes man (politely referred to in this article as "a consensus builder who is loath to confront civilian leaders on war strategy") comes out against "the surge," the game is over.
(Question: Who leaked this? My first thought was Pace or someone else at the Joint Chiefs, but let's not leave out the possibility that this was an immunizing leak from the White House.
If Pace was planning to drop this on the front page of the NYTimes the day before the Petraeus' testimony, somebody at the White House might have figured an early Friday in the LATimes might be better. This allows time for all the followup articles to be done Saturday.
Just asking.)
2 Comments:
Peter Pace's public prediction peeved the Pres and pre-empted Petraeus.
By Anonymous, at 10:52 AM
Parrying previous predictions that Pace would please the president?
By mikevotes, at 10:53 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home