That is my prediction - Bush will increase troop levels in Iraq. This story buttresses my belief:

As President Bush weighs new policy options for Iraq, strong support has coalesced in the Pentagon behind a military plan to "double down" in the country with a substantial buildup in American troops, an increase in industrial aid and a major combat offensive against Muqtada Sadr, the radical Shiite leader impeding development of the Iraqi government. The Joint Chiefs of Staff will present their assessment and recommendations to Bush at the Pentagon today. Military officials, including some advising the chiefs, have argued that an intensified effort may be the only way to get the counterinsurgency strategy right and provide a chance for victory. The approach overlaps somewhat a course promoted by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz). But the Pentagon proposals add several features, including the confrontation with Sadr, a possible renewed offensive in the Sunni stronghold of Al Anbar province, a large Iraqi jobs program and a proposal for a long-term increase in the size of the military. Such an option would appear to satisfy Bush's demand for a strategy focused on victory rather than disengagement. . .

The Bush/McCain/Lieberman Iraq Debacle. Sad.

Richard Cohen on Iraq:

[T]he ending is inevitable. We will get out, and the only question that remains is whether we get out with 3,000 dead or 4,000 or 5,000. At some point the American people will not countenance, and Congress will not support, a war that cannot be won. Just how many lives will be wasted in what we all know is a wasted effort is about the only question still left on the table.

If President Bush intends to announce a new strategy for Iraq (stay the course a little less?), he won't do so until after he recovers from the White House Christmas and New Years Eve parties.

Mr. Bush had been expected to speak to the American people about Iraq before Christmas. But a spokesman for the National Security Council said today that the talk will now take place after the New Year.

With daily news like this, there may not be much left of Iraq by the time he makes his decision.

Seventy people, most of them Shiite laborers looking for work, were killed Tuesday when a pickup truck packed with explosives was detonated in a crowded square in the city’s center this morning, Iraqi officials and witnesses said. More than 230 people were wounded.

Silvestre Reyes clearly can not do the job of House Intel Chair:

Reyes stumbled when I asked him a simple question about al Qaeda at the end of a 40-minute interview in his office last week. Members of the Intelligence Committee, mind you, are paid $165,200 a year to know more than basic facts about our foes in the Middle East.

We warmed up with a long discussion about intelligence issues and Iraq. And then we veered into terrorism’s major players. To me, it’s like asking about Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland: Who’s on what side?

The dialogue went like this:

Al Qaeda is what, I asked, Sunni or Shia?

“Al Qaeda, they have both,” Reyes said. “You’re talking about predominately?”

“Sure,” I said, not knowing what else to say.

“Predominantly — probably Shiite,” he ventured.

This is a man who does not even know this but pretends to know enough to call on the US to send in tens of thousands of more troops. What a mistake Pelosi made naming Reyes. Disclosure -- I urged the naming of Jane Harman as Intel Chair. h/t - Ezra.

As Donald Rumsfeld makes one last secret trip to Iraq (a final desperate search for WMD's?), he is surely comforted to know that his life is at less risk than the troops who served under his watch. At least 2,930 of them have died in Iraq -- so far.

Two worth noting:

Sen. Russ Feingold on Countdown (Crooks and Liars has the video):

The fact is this commission was composed apparently entirely of people who did not have the judgment to oppose this Iraq war in the first place, and did not have the judgment to realize it was not a wise move in the fight against terrorism. So that's who is doing this report. Then I looked at the list of who testified before them. There is virtually no one who opposed the war in the first place. Virtually no one who has been really calling for a different strategy that goes for a global approach to the war on terrorism. So this is really a Washington inside job and it shows not in the description of what's happened - that's fairly accurate - but it shows in the recommendations. It's been called a classic Washington compromise that does not do the job of extricating us from Iraq in a way that we can deal with the issues in Southeast Asia, in Afghanistan, and in Somalia which are every bit as important as what is happening in Iraq. This report does not do the job and it's because it was not composed of a real representative group of Americans who believe what the American people showed in the election, which is that it's time for us to have a timetable to bring the troops out of Iraq.

Al Gore on the Today Show:

The bad news from Iraq keeps coming:

Ten American service members were killed from improvised explosive devices in Iraq on Wednesday. The news came hours after a mortar attack killed at least eight people and wounded dozens in the Sadr City Shiite district of the capital, police said.

In the 10 American deaths, five troops were killed in the north, and five were killed in Anbar province, a U.S. military official told NBC’s Jim Miklaszewski. No further details were immediately available.

Bump and Update: The report is out. WaPo coverage is here. The Wall St. Journal has the Executive Summary. (pdf) Excerpts are here.

Bush and Robert Gates say it's not the last word, just one of many ideas the Administration will consider.

****
Original Post:

With the precision of a swiss timepiece, the Iraq Study Group Report will be released today.

From the U.S. Institute for Peace:

A PDF version of the ISG report will be available for download after 11:00 AM EST on the websites of the U.S. Institute of Peace (www.usip.org), the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy at Rice University (www.bakerinstitute.org), the Center for Strategic and International Studies (www.csis.org), and the Center for the Study of the Presidency (www.thepresidency.org).

At least five Marines are going to be charged with crimes ranging from negligent homicide to murder in the November, 2005 killings of 24 Iraqis in Haditha.

The 5 marines are said to have been the ones who killed the 24 Iraqis, including 5 men in a taxi that approached the marines’ convoy after the explosion that killed a 20-year-old lance corporal, and 19 other civilians in several houses nearby. About 10 of the dead were women and children who appeared to have been killed by rifle fire at close range, military officials said.

Reyes feels free to do this:

In a surprise twist in the debate over Iraq, Rep. Silvestre Reyes, the soon-to-be chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said he wants to see an increase of 20,000 to 30,000 U.S. troops as part of a stepped up effort to “dismantle the militias.”

Sure Reyes, that'll do it. What a dope.

Harman had seen the light. We had gotten her to see the light. She would never have done this.

Via Political Wire, it's not out yet but you can pre-order it.

The Iraq Study Group Report: The Way Forward - A New Approach

Donald Rumsfeld said our strategy in Iraq isn't working. He's gone, but Stephen Hadley said Sunday Bush will consider his suggestions, as well as those from the Iraq Study Group which are due on Wednesday.

The Wall St. Journal now reports(free link) that many senior Pentagon officials are at the opposite end of the spectrum -- saying more troops and more money is the only way to win in Iraq.

Outside the military, most of the debate is focused on a U.S. troop withdrawal. But inside the Pentagon, the recent dismissal of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has given some new life to arguments by military officers who say the U.S. must pour more troops and money into the country to expand the Iraqi army -- the one institution in Iraq that has shown some promise -- and stabilize the capital.