The Larry Kane Report

I have never quite seen anything like the contradictory signals emerging from the government about the war in Iraq.

National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley suggests the U.S is flexible on a timetable for an Iraqi takeover of security operations. The White House Press office says there will be no shift in Iraqi policy. The President stops using “stay the course” in his remarks. General Casey, commander in Iraq, puts more pressure on the lame Iraqi government to get militias under control. In the same announcement, General Casey says he might need more American troops in Iraq.

All of this rhetoric leads me to the question: Does anyone know what our real policy in Iraq is? Second question: Might this be a pre-election ploy? I doubt that. But I do suspect that there is an internal struggle going on in the White House about what to do next.

Meanwhile, Republican senators are pushing for a change in tactics and a genuine policy discussion as the nation moves forward in this dangerous war. Death and casualty tolls are rising and we are all having a tough time getting a definitive policy statement from the government.

With so many soldiers on the ground, in the air , and on the seas, we need to demand a direct answer to the question: who speaks for the White House and why are the signals about future war policy mired in conflicting statements?

Again, I have never seen a government speak with such confusion and contradiction.

Democrats are doing their part with a call for a change in tactics. Leading the way is the only man with a plan, Senator Joe Biden, who has suggested a political division of Iraq, with real power sharing. The current Iraqi government looks the other way when murderous militias rule the streets. Without some visionary concept to deal with murder by all sides in the conflict, a plan with real peace potentialm Iraq will slide into anarchy with or without our troops.