ARTICLE: McCaffrey Paints Gloomy Picture of Iraq: In Contrast to His Previous Views, Retired General Writes of 'Strategic Peril', By Thomas E. Ricks, Washington Post , March 28, 2007; Page A11

People have hung on McCaffrey's word for years WRT Iraq, and I've found his reports to be highly accurate.

Here he cites some good reasons for optimism but likewise underscores the solid reasons for long-term pessimism.

In weighing both judgments, you can't help but get the feeling that Bush and Co. are simply running out the clock, hoping to barrow the score as much as possible but not making the desperate run to pull out any win.

The diplomatic offensive is similarly arrayed: just enough to get some short-term progress (perhaps on Palestine) but not enough to force any comprehensive advance on any timetable Bush can complete.

As long as this mix of short- and long-term signals continue to be sent, I would expect similarly half-hearted attempts from all concerned: all will make moves that look like an openness to serious concessions but none will quite follow through in any breakthrough manner. They all just want it on the record for the next administration that they've been trying as hard as anyone else to make things work.

Meanwhile, the Dems will do everything conceivable to tie Bush's hand in case Rice is being set up on Iran just like Powell was set up on Iraq. They are wise and correct to do this, because the danger of some stupid kinetic reach for quick solutions near the end of the term will be large, given the temptation of such an approach to those in this administration who believe that restoring power to the presidency is their real historical legacy.

Would I like to be able to argue for a better outcome still on Bush's watch? You bet.

But here's where the lack of strategic imagination in this crowd comes to haunt us, reminding us that Bush's second term was a profound electoral mistake.