So, I don't get it.

We want our troops withdrawn and apparently now, Iraq would like to see something drawn up and Bush doesn't want to give a time frame?

It's like, he wants us there forever....

/rolls eyes.

An exact date might be hard because it is difficult to predict the future. Still it should be done if Iraq is asking us to.

An approximate date with the possibility of changing it as conditions merit could and should be done.

Also, a caveat could be added allowing for some troops to be stationed there just like we have troops in various other countries. Provided of course, the Iraqi government wants us to.

For that matter instead of an exact or even an approximate date, how about just saying we will withdraw our troops whenever the legally elected government of Iraq asks us to.

There's no likelihood of Bush giving a date as he has his own withdrawal timetable from the Whitehouse going on.

It would be a headache to arrange as whatever the final withdrawal timetable is, someone will have an objection.

History won't remember him as The President Who Sent The Troops To Iraq And Then Decided When They Were Coming Home™.

Plus, on the off-chance that his advisors give him a good strategy and for once he pays attention to him he could possibly be handing that strategy to The Democrats, and one of the biggest drawbacks of adversarial political rule around the world is that for much of the time a greater weight is given to diminishing the opposition than it is to benefiting the country and/or electorate.

On a different note, I felt this was a little unfair.

I've not seen any of his work, but that seems a little harsh.

We have built the largest embassy in the world in Baghdad. As large as Vatican city, 104 acres.

Mr Bush is not planning any reduction in troops or influence any time soon.

He isn't going to have a choice come January 21st.

What is going on now has more to do with the situation the next President is going to have to deal with.

There will be an eventual reduction (significant reduction) in troops. And believe it or not, BOTH candidates have pretty much the exact position on it.

McCain says that the situation on the ground will determine the reduction. Obama says that the current trends in Iraq mean that a withdrawal will happen in 16 months (unless something changes). Same position, different wording in order to cater to the constituency.

Exactly, politics and oil will rule in either case and that's probably in our best interests.

Exactly.

Neither are going to fully withdraw before the end of their first term.

Anyone who believes that is delusional

I have an idea: Don't join the military! They wont have to worry about a withdraw if there's nobody to send ... and I wish a motherf**ker would try the draft, then they'll really see how quickly this war ends.

There will always be a U.S. military presence in Iraq. It's been there long before the war started, it'll be there long after it's "over."

Charlie Rangel (D-NY) is the only guy pushing for a draft. It ain't going to happen.

Sure..lets let the insurgents know exactly when we're leaving so they can plan their attacks accordingly. Sounds great.

I'm sure they'd notice eventually.

It's surprise attacks that work. Surprise retreats have never really had their place in military strategy.

Exactly, even the military doesn't want a draft.
The only ones calling for a draft are doing so as part of a scare tactic.

It would take an immense attack on our own soil to even have people start to truly contemplate a draft. Even then, if such an attack were to happen, there would be more than enough volunteers to make a draft unnecessary.

Bush's actions do not surprise me at all. The few supporters he has left would feel betrayed if he looked like he supported withdrawing at any time when it could be possible that our government won't be satisfied with their so called development.