Fred Kagan at least has a sharp critique of the ISG’s unrealistic realism:
Some of the most important training Iraqi Army units get today comes from operating side-by-side with American combat units in clear-and-hold missions, searches and raids. It is one thing to have trainers tell you what to do and watch you do it. It is another to participate in well-planned and skillfully-executed operations. Ironically, pulling American forces back from combat missions will actually remove one of the most important elements of training Iraqi forces.
A serious strategy to help the Iraqis establish security now would not only embed more American troops with Iraqi forces but increase the number of U.S. combat troops in Baghdad – and work with the Iraqis not just to clear insurgent areas, but to hold them once they’ve been cleared.
But do we have enough troops to do this? And why was this not done years ago? Oh, forget that last question, but rephrase it: given the level of talent in the White House, what are the chances of getting it right this time?
The Dish 