Petreaus, Crocker say the plan is to stay in Iraq until Bush leaves office

Petreaus has promised that there will be some troop reductions - a handful of Marines within a month or so and beginning next April sufficient Army Brigades and Marine Regimental Combat Teams will be withdrawn to bring the number of U.S. troops in Iraq at roughly 130,000. That's the same level as when the surge started.

Then, if the Iraqi Army can replace the Americans, the number may possibly (were his fingers crossed?) be down to about 100,000. From the LA Times:

The plans also would allow Bush to live up to his pledge to the defining mission of his presidency, and perhaps to improve his chances for a decent legacy. He can say he left office pursuing a strategy that was having at least some success in suppressing violence, a claim that some historians may view sympathetically.

"Bush has found his exit strategy," said Kenneth M. Pollack, a former government Mideast specialist now at the Brookings Institution. As Petraeus met with lawmakers and unveiled chart upon chart showing declining troop levels, the U.S. commander seemed to have opened a new discussion about how the United States would wind up its commitment to Iraq. Yet viewed more closely, his presentation, and that of U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker, were better suited to the defense of an earlier strategy: "stay the course."

Petraeus said the government might be able to consider withdrawing some troops below pre-"surge" levels under some circumstances. But Crocker's emphasis was on how long it would take Iraq to chart its new path, and on the necessity for American support into this dim and distant future.

As Bush has promised since someone finally convinced him that his personal war in Iraq is a disaster - he is going to punt the Iraqi problem down to the next President.

The only two reasons for this are to provide something resembling a positive legacy for Bush when he leaves office, and to leave it to the Democratic President who will replace him to pull the troops out of Iraq and face the right-wing demagogues yelling "You Lost Iraq!"

That is a benefit for Bush and a benefit for the Republicans who want to run on national security. That offers no benefit to the Iraqi nation or people, and no benefit to America. But that has never bothered Republicans, has it?