Bush to announce troop drawdown, officials say

Petraeus, Crocker questioned
Word of Bush’s plan spread on a day in which several Republicans on the Senate’s Foreign Relations Committee and its Armed Services Committee sharply questioned Petraeus and Crocker in separate hearings.

“Are we going to continue to invest blood and treasure at the same rate we’re doing now? For what?” asked Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., who supports legislation setting a deadline to bring troops home.

Whereas Republicans were once deferential to the thinking of officials running the war, particularly uniformed officers, Hagel and other GOP senators on the panel said they doubted that simply giving war commanders more time would necessarily yield results.

“In my judgment, some type of success in Iraq is possible, but as policymakers, we should acknowledge that we are facing extraordinarily narrow margins for achieving our goals,” said Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, the top Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee.

Sen. Norm Coleman said he appreciates plans to return troop levels to 130,000 but that he wants a longer-term vision other than suggestions that Petraeus and Crocker return to Capitol Hill in mid-March to give another assessment.

“Americans want to see light at the end of the tunnel,” said Coleman, R-Minn.

Crocker: Stakes are high
Echoing testimony given to the House on Monday, Petraeus and Crocker acknowledged that Iraq remains largely dysfunctional but said violence had decreased since the influx of added U.S. troops.

Crocker said he believed Iraq had “almost completely unraveled” in late 2006 and early 2007. The increased security, if given more time, could pave the way for political reconciliation, he said.

The ambassador said he fears that announcing troop withdrawals, as Democrats want, would focus Iraqi attention on “building the walls, stocking ammunition and getting ready for a big nasty street fight” rather than working toward reconciliation.

“I do believe that Iraq’s leaders have the will to tackle the country’s pressing problems, although it will take longer than we initially anticipated because of the environment and the gravity of the issue,” Crocker said.

The stakes are high, he added.

“An Iraq that falls into chaos or civil war will mean massive human suffering — well beyond what has already occurred within Iraq’s borders,” Crocker said.

Does war make U.S. safer?
The House hearing fell on the anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

In an unusual admission, Petraeus said he was not sure whether his proposal on Iraq would make America safer.

A visibly heated Sen. John Warner, R-Va., asked the question to which Petraeus said: “Sir, I don’t know, actually. I have not sat down and sorted that out in my mind. What I have focused on and riveted on is how to accomplish the mission of the multinational force Iraq.”

Warner said he hoped the general kept in mind the casualties that might result from his recommendation. He also said he did not think the U.S. strategy should rely on Baghdad’s political progress because it might not happen.

More from msnbc.com Power struggle threatens Pakistan’s leader  Swine flu booster shots? Good luck with that From Levi to Letterman: Palin's rough year Obama gets mixed reviews on China's blogs Ice addict heads for poles, Everest | Trek posts On Twitter: Breaking news updates | Weird and wild

MORE FROM POLITICS

Politics Section Front

CQ: GOP presidential hopefuls — You’re on notice   Obama, Hu stress cooperation Poll: Americans fret over health overhaul costs Obama’s bow in Japan sparks some criticism Newsweek: Would House health bill boost spending? Mutual financial reliance binds U.S., China NYT: Drug firms raise prices ahead of reform From Levi to Letterman: Palin's rough year Carter defends handling of Iran hostage crisis FDR papers to become public soon Politics Section Front   Add Politics headlines to your news reader: