This analysis, ironically published in the newspaper once known as Judith Miller's war tabloid, is more on the mark about the Iraq Study Group and President George W. Bush than so much of the rest that passes for analysis.
From the Article: Rich concludes by predicting that Bush "will stay the course, with various fake-outs along the way to keep us from thinking we’ve 'lost,' until the whole mess is deposited in the lap of the next president." But he adds that it is a "reckless flight from reality to suppose that the world will stand still while we dally. The Iraq Study Group’s insistence on dragging out its deliberations until after Election Day for the sake of domestic politics mocked and undermined the urgency of its own mission. Meanwhile the violence metastasized. Eleven more of our soldiers were killed on the day the group finally put on its show."
Rich then noted the Iraq-Vietnam parallels, with President Johnson's new Pentagon chief, Clark Clifford, ordering up a commission to study the faltering war effort in 1968: "In March, a bipartisan group of wise men (from Dean Acheson to Omar Bradley) was summoned to the White House, where it seconded the notion of disengagement.
"But there the stories of Vietnam and Iraq diverge. Those wise men, unlike the Iraq Study Group, were clear in their verdict. And that Texan president, unlike ours, paid more than lip service to changing course. He abruptly announced he would abjure re-election, restrict American bombing and entertain the idea of peace talks. But as Stanley Karnow recounts, it was already too late, after some 20,000 casualties and three years of all-out war, for an easy escape: 'The frustrating talks were to drag on for another five years. More Americans would be killed in Vietnam than had died there previously. And the United States itself would be torn apart by the worst internal upheavals in a century.'