The plan to dumb down Americans and their expectations to avoid "losing"

Oh, this is rich, last night when I planned to write this, I thought it would just be a recap, and a brief opinion piece on how Rumsfeld had written a memo outlining the need for a change in strategy in Iraq just two days before he resigned. However, I've come to understand that, that wasn't his only intention. No, instead, Rumsfeld thought the White House needed to change strategy in Iraq, and LOWER AMERICAN EXPECTATIONS, BY REDEFINING VICTORY, TO AVOID THE APPEARANCE OF LOSING. That's right, instead of trying to change the strategy in an attempt to improve the situation in Iraq, he simply wanted to "trick" Americans into thinking we were winning by DUMBING US DOWN - and here's how the story goes:

Two days before resigning as Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld wrote to the White House explaining that he thought the strategy in Iraq was not working, and a major change was needed. According to an article which appeared on the New York Times' website, Rumsfeld recognized the need for a change:

"In my view it is time for a major adjustment," Rumsfeld wrote in a Nov. 6 memo to the White House. "Clearly, what U.S. forces are currently doing in Iraq is not working well enough or fast enough."

The story goes on to say that DONALD RUMSFELD HIMSELF WAS NOT CONFIDENT THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION WOULD ACCEPT ANY PLANS TO DEVELOP AN EFFECTIVE ALTERNATIVE STRATEGY, AND TO LIMIT FURTHER POLITICAL FALLOUT, HE SUGGESTED A CAMPAIGN TO LOWER PUBLIC EXPECTATIONS FOR SUCCESS IN IRAQ.

Hook. Line. Sinker.

Rumsfeld said that upon announcing any new strategy, the Bush administration should ALSO announce that they are only doing so on a "trial basis." Rumsfeld apparently wanted nothing more than to avoid appearing to have "lost."

“This will give us the ability to readjust and move to another course, if necessary, and therefore not ‘lose.’

Recast the U.S. military mission and the U.S. goals (how we talk about them) — go minimalist."

According to the article, Rumsfeld wants to withhold reconstruction funding (and security), from areas prone to violence:

One of the more provocative options would punish provinces that failed to cooperate with the Americans by withdrawing economic assistance and security. “Stop rewarding bad behavior, as was done in Falluja when they pushed in reconstruction funds, and start rewarding good behavior,” the option reads. “No more reconstruction assistance in areas where there is violence.”

But wait, wouldn't this amount to "cutting and running?" One of the main talking points the GOP has used against the Democrats for MONTHS now?

To be fair though, no one is really paying any attention to this inane proposal by the outgoing Bush puppet. I'd also like to point out one proposal that's being disregarded (according to the NYT article) as "below the line (of acceptability):"

"...an international conference modeled on the Dayton accords that produced an agreement on Bosnia..."

Because clearly, meeting with other countries in an effort to solve the problem in Iraq is unpatriotic, and un-American.

All of this was leaked to the New York Times last night, and according to an Associated Press article, Pentagon press secretary Eric Ruff denied he was the source, but confirmed the memo's authenticity. Ruff told the AP:

"The formulation of these ideas evolved over a period of several weeks."

What, like maybe 156 of them?

Here's a few of the options listed in the memo, as they appeared in the afore mentioned AP article:

1. "Publicly announce a set of benchmarks agreed to by the Iraqi government and the U.S. ... to chart a path ahead for the Iraqi government and Iraqi people (to get them moving) and for the U.S. public (to reassure them that progress can and is being made)."

2. "Significantly increase U.S. trainers and embeds, and transfer more U.S. equipment to Iraqi security forces."

3. "Initiate a reverse embeds program ... by putting one or more Iraqi soldiers with every U.S. and possibly coalition squad."

4. Aggressively beef up Iraqi ministries by reaching out to U.S. military retirees and Reserve and National Guard volunteers.

5. Conduct an accelerated drawdown of U.S. bases, noting they have already been reduced from 110 to 55. "Plan to get down to 10 to 15 bases by April 2007, and to 5 bases by July 2007."

6. "Retain high-end ... capability ... to target al-Qaida, death squads, and Iranians in Iraq, while drawing down all other coalition forces, except those necessary to provide certain key enablers" for Iraqi forces.

7. Provide U.S. security forces "only for those provinces or cities that openly request U.S. help and that actively cooperate."

8. Stop rewarding "bad behavior" with reconstruction funds and start rewarding "good behavior."

9. "Position substantial U.S. forces near the Iranian and Syrian borders to reduce infiltration and, importantly, reduce Iranian influence on the Iraqi government."

10. Withdraw U.S. forces from vulnerable positions and move to a quick reaction force status, operating from within Iraq and Kuwait, to be available when Iraqi security forces need assistance.

11. "Begin modest withdrawals of U.S. and coalition forces (start `taking our hand off the cycle seat') so Iraqis know they have to pull up their socks, step up and take responsibility for their country."

In conclusion, America, the GOP thinks you're simply too stupid to understand, and all they really want to do is lower your expectations to avoid the appearance of "loss." Please remember this in 2008.