Assessment of military & civilian types in Iraq = Jan. elections not sure thing. -- Write this down: if/when we call them off, it isn't Kerry's fault.

A New York Times article reports:

Senior American military commanders and civilian officials in Iraq are speaking more candidly about the hurdles that could jeopardize their plans to defeat an adaptive and tenacious insurgency and hold elections in January.

Outwardly, they give an upbeat assessment that the counterinsurgency is winnable. But in interviews with 15 of the top American generals, admirals and embassy officials conducted in Iraq in late October, many described risks that could worsen the security situation and derail the political process that they are counting on to help quell the insurgency.

For the first time, military officers also disclosed that the United States could begin withdrawing its 138,000 troops from Iraq in July, if Iraqi security forces have established control and the threats plaguing Iraq now have lessened. "It's a mark on the wall," said one senior officer.

But when pressed in interviews and informal conversations - mostly not for attribution, because of fear that their more candid remarks could be used as campaign fodder back home - senior commanders and civilian officials voiced misgivings about how their plans could go awry, reflecting the unpredictability of events in Iraq.
_______________

A classic line in the article follows, and you don't have to have been in the military where we knew that OD means Olive-Drab, FM means Field Manual, etc., to appreciate the title of the noted 43-page document:

"The military is measuring its progress against a 43-page document, prosaically titled "Multinational Force Iraq Campaign Plan: Operation Iraqi Freedom."

Is the use of the adjective "Multinational" an attempt at irony or just wishful thinking? Maybe it's just being truthful. More than one is multi, and although I did not forget our great friend and ally the Brits, perhaps I did forget Poland.