As the lapdog, corporate media contiues to sit up and bark every time Bush snaps his fingers, repeating Bush's mantra that withdrawal of U.S. troops would signal a message of "defeat" to "the enemy," without offering any evidence except Bush's own twisted "logic," a more critical examination given here leads to the opposite conclusion that a U.S. withdrawal would actually represent a great loss to al qaeda since al qaeda will have lost its "cause celebre," its modis operandi in Iraq. In other words, it would no longer be able to draw upon anti-Americanism as an ideological recruiting tool to suck in young, frustrated and alienated Muslims to become suicide bombers. Also, both Sunni and Shiite would be forced to deal directly with this cancerous minority. Al-Qaeda would find it tougher to recruit jihadists and would likely face military pressure from Iraqi nationalists fed up with foreign interference.

Iraq & the Logic of Timetables
By Robert Parry
April 12, 2007

It has become a standard part of George W. Bush’s litany for why he will veto a congressional plan for setting a timetable for withdrawing U.S. combat forces from Iraq: “Why would you say to the enemy, ‘Here’s a timetable. Just go ahead and wait us out?’”

Well, there’s a logical answer to Bush’s rhetorical question. If a timetable encourages Iraqi insurgents to silence their guns and to stop planting roadside bombs – even temporarily to wait the Americans out – Iraq might get the breathing space it needs to begin healing its sectarian divisions.

Indeed, one could argue that Bush’s “surge” plan and Bush’s fear about letting the enemy “wait us out” offer essentially the same opportunity: to achieve enough peace and quiet in the short term for reconciliation and reconstruction to begin.

But a withdrawal timetable has additional advantages. First, it has the chance of bringing relative peace to the entire country as insurgents pull back anticipating a total American military withdrawal, while the “surge” seeks greater security only for Baghdad.

One of the criticisms of the “surge” is that it amounts to a version of “Whack-a-Mole,” with insurgents disappearing for a while only to pop up in another location vacated by U.S. troops. The “surge” rationale, however, is that even a temporary sense of security in the capital might give the Iraqi government a chance to restore calm.

Another plus for a withdrawal timetable is that it would assure Iraqis that the U.S. military presence will not be open-ended, thus undercutting one of the strongest arguments of the insurgency, that it is a national resistance fighting a foreign occupation.

A date certain for American withdrawal also would put non-Iraqi al-Qaeda operatives – who number only an estimated five percent of the armed insurgency – in a tighter fix. Without the United States to point to, al-Qaeda would find it tougher to recruit jihadists and would likely face military pressure from Iraqi nationalists fed up with foreign interference.

That is why al-Qaeda leaders view Bush’s open-ended war in Iraq as crucial to their long-range plans for spreading their radical ideology throughout the Muslim world. As “Atiyah,” one of Osama bin Laden’s top lieutenants, explained in a Dec. 11, 2005, letter, “prolonging the war is in our interest.”

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2007/041207.html

Also, see "Dying for W":

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2007/042507.html