Mounting Death Toll Forces U.S. to Speed Iraq Handover

[kskiska]

Strengthening resistance has convinced the coalition that a transfer of security is needed, reports Peter Beaumont in Baghdad

Iraqi guerrillas claimed their 400th US military victim yesterday morning in a roadside blast in a Baghdad suburb, even as the US unveiled its plans for transfer of sovereignty and security to an Iraqi transitional government.

By the early evening, at least 12 soldiers died after two Black Hawk helicopters crashed after apparently colliding in mid-air over the northern city of Mosul. Witnesses said they collided after one was already ablaze from an explosion.

The bombs were coming like punctuation marks to the coalition's best intentions. Even as the Iraqi Governing Council met within the city's heavily fortified convention centre to announce the accelerated transfer of sovereignty to a transitional government, another blast reverberated across the city.

These explosions hang like question marks over the latest US political and military initiatives in Iraq, designed to bring the escalating insurgency to an end, but whose very trajectory - so many fear - could simply bring more violence.

The question they pose to ordinary Iraqis is whether the plan is the answer to their prayers, or simply an excuse for America to cut and run, despite President George W. Bush's denials that it is his 'exit strategy'.

more…
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1086203,00.html

[jobycom]

1. Good ole Bush. Tuck tail, run.

He doesn't know how to win anything when he can't blame the Democrats, and since he can't here, he has no idea what to do. He's trying to run away, now. Blows up half the country to get a man he hasn't got (for the second time in his administration), and now is going to leave them to civil war. The victor will be worse than Saddam (or maybe even Saddam), because it will take extreme violence to regain control. Which is why we hadn't ousted him before now.

Republicans. Shoot first, figure out why second, and worry about consequences when it's too late.

[eablair3]

4. Yes, Sounds like they are losing and Bush wants out

I guess if it wasn't for these attacks, Bush wouldn't have put this shorter timetable up. I heard on the news where Bremer gave in to certain demands of the appointed Governing Iraqi Council.

Bush now says they will vacate by July 1, 2004.

What kind of statement is that? I thought he was "going to stay the course", "finish the job". and "our resolve will not change>" Isn't rhetoric great. It changes by the day.

It really sounds like Bush and Co is trying to high tail it and run out of there by trying to save face in finding a way out.

[opihimoimoi]

2. Bush is now in a NO WIN Situation.... Damned if you do, and Damned if you

don't.

He was supposed to think of the long term... coulda, shoulda, woulda, but didn't.

Come, we find some crystal balls for him.

[Ilsa]

3. Later the Repukes will blame

the "Saddam lovers" for getting us out of Iraq "too soon" before we had completely wiped out all of the terrorists in the world because we had drawn them all into Iraq as part of the master plan.

I hate the revisionist spin they use.