The current wisdom on the attitude of Bush to the events in Iraq is driven by the newly published book by Woodward. This says that he is in denial of the real mess that exists in Iraq and is oblivious to the entreaties of those few of his senior advisers that attempt to persuade him otherwise .

We forget that, however contemporary is its publication, Woodward is recording history, even if it is very recent history.

Andrew North was categorical in his statement: Bush and his administration now accept that the policies for Iraq have failed.

From this realisation will come a set of new initiatives from the White House. Before giving North's forecast of what is now going to transpire, let me begin in the way that the news segment was introduced.

The news anchor began by briefly listing the events of the last week in relation to Iraq.

Prominence was given to the twenty-one deaths of US military this week (twenty-one deaths the majority of which were the result of isolated incidents and did not involve one substantial disaster such a a helicopter transporting troops being downed).

The UN report that 100 Iraqis were losing their lives EVERY day was referenced next (which earlier a commentator on Sky News had equated to to half a million lives being lost each year in the United States).

Finally, the US military revelation that 4000 Iraqi police had lost their lives in the last two years was cited.

To this was added the information regarding the first death of a member of the Iraqi government and the US military briefing today announcing the highest ever level of IEDs being used against US troops.

These  bare-bone facts without elaboration were given before a satellite link with Baghdad was established  for Andrew North to comment on the situation.

Because of the brevity of his comments, it is here that I would like to refer to an earlier report he filed on October 3 that can be seen on the BBC site. In it, he writes:

The political storm in Washington sparked by US journalist Bob Woodward's new book - which suggests President Bush is concealing the level of violence in Iraq - has not been reflected in Baghdad.

The reason is simple. Most people, even American officials, know how bad things are.

The main subject covered by North is the latest initiatives by the stumbling Iraqi government

...there is a sense of desperation in the Iraqi government's announcement of yet another plan to tackle the sectarian violence tearing the city apart.

This is the third security initiative the government has come up with for the capital since it took office just four months ago.

US Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad warns the government has just "two months" left to turn the tide.

But the bloodshed between the majority Shia and minority Sunni community has only got worse.

Each new murder, often involving sadistic torture, breeds the next, as relatives vow revenge.

More and more Iraqis fear it is now too late to prevent this widening spiral of killing becoming full blown civil war.

So, many gave little more than a weary shrug on hearing of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's new four-point initiative.

But even those welcoming the move were sceptical, saying they do not trust officials to implement it.

North goes on to say:

There is growing unease among US generals and diplomats here at what they believe is Mr Maliki's unwillingness to move against Shia militias.

While the US ambassador and the senior American military commander publicly welcomed the plan, privately US officials say they are not raising their hopes.

"It's significant, but we're not seeing this as a turning point", said one.

More and more communities in and around Baghdad are being dragged into the sectarian conflict.

The United Nations estimates that up to 9,000 people a week are now fleeing as a result.

This deterioration in the Baghdad region has continued despite the deployment of thousands of additional US troops.

Their operation, known as Together Forward, in conjunction with Iraqi police and army units, continues.

The next stage involves plans to build trenches around Baghdad to make it harder for insurgents and militia groups to get themselves and supplies in.

But no-one believes such a huge city can be sealed off.

And this operation also means the Americans are more exposed to attack. At least 15 soldiers and marines have been killed since Saturday, most in the Baghdad area.

In Washington, much has been made of Bob Woodward's statements that there are now 800-900 attacks a week.

In fact, such figures were already public.The Washington-based think tank the Brookings Institution has published such statistics on its Iraq Index for some time.

The debate here is not over statistics or how bad things are. It is what to do about it before it is too late.

The answers seem to be running out.

North's assessment was subsequently fully confirmed two days later by, of all people, that stern supporter of Bush and the Iraq war, Republican John Warner. "Iraq has gone sideways" was Warner's despairing comment - although "sideways" was an euphemisim for a downward spiral.

Additionally, just six hours ago, ABC was reporting:

The bleak characterization of the situation in Iraq made by Republican John Warner on Thursday could be the only the first such call by ranking Republicans for a possible change of course in Iraq in the months to come, according to a Democratic senator, who says the Republicans have confided in him.

Senator Joe Biden of Delaware, the senior Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, told reporters today that at least two Republicans in addition to Warner have said privately that they will come out more forcefully against the White House strategy in Iraq.

So if North's reporting of three days ago was subsequently given credibility two days later by Warner, what is he now saying twenty-four hours after Condi Rice left Baghdad following her fleeting visit?

It is that Bush concedes that the Iraq policies have failed and that there is no solution to be found in the poorly pursued strategies that involve Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki and the Iraqi government, who themselves are part of the problem.

Iraq is a mess and Bush knows it, says North. Denial has ended.

Not surprisingly, he says that nothing will unfold until after Congressional elections in November. Until then, there will be no change in the stance of the White House. Not least, Bush is devoid of ideas as to what to do, as is the rest of his administration.

This ties in with ABC News aside on Biden's comments on the two Republican dissidents joining Warner that he was identifying:

Don't expect any bombshells this week or next, though. Both of the senators who have apparently confided in their Democratic colleague told him they will wait until after the Nov. 7th elections. Biden did not name the senators. He did say that Warner is not one of them.

"Two leading Republican senators have come to me," Biden said. He said they told him, "'Joe, I am getting beat up by my team.'"

Biden said after the election, "the need to protect the president will be nonexistent" and Republicans will be freer to break with the White House and call for change in Iraq.

The problem is that Biden is probably talking to two Republican senators who are out of the loop on White House thinking. Not so, I would suggest, is John Warner.

According to North, immediately after the elections, Bush will begin an urgent review to provide him with the policies that are now currently non-existent and these will set a totally new course of action. This will not involve withdrawal from Iraq nor even a drawdown of troops. North says the military are strongly opposed to such action.

Biden's anticipation of mutiny by some Republicans will dissolve as soon as this review becomes more fully known.

North looked hard into the camera when he then said:"Watch former Secretary of State James A. Baker III. It is he who will be charged with presenting urgent options to Bush for a totally revised strategy that will be implemented in Iraq in December/January."

There is confirmation of this in the US media, although not presented in the context of a complete about-face by Bush. I believe that what was seen by Biden as an extraordinary pulling away from Bush by John Warner is in fact no such thing. It is simply the preparation of the ground by one of Bush's closest allies for the new strategy, whatever form it will take. Hence, in reporting on Senator Warner's comments, yesterday the New York Times went on to quote him as saying:

"In two or three months if this thing hasn't come to fruition and this level of violence is not under control, I think it's a responsibility of our government to determine: Is there a change of course we should take?" Senator Warner said.

He did not specify what shift might be necessary in Iraq, but he said that the American military had done what it could to stabilize Iraq and that no policy options should be taken "off the table." ...

...Mr. Warner, whose term as chairman expires at the end of the year, said he hoped his committee would be able to hold hearings in November on policy options recommended by an independent panel, led by former Representative Lee H. Hamilton of Indiana and former Secretary of State James A. Baker III.

So the White House recognises that its policies in Iraq have truly failed and has absolutely no confidence that the latest initiatives in that country will succeed. Don't expect Bush or his allies to flag that up in this election period. Bush has no idea what to do next. Don't expect Bush or his allies to flag that up in this election period.

What he will flag up is his intention, along with that of his military, to remain in Iraq. That is why he is so adamantly calling out the Democrats on their policies for withdrawal.

IMPLICATIONS FOR DEMOCRATS

Firstly, I am at odds with Markos and other Internet commentators who believe that Bush's attempts to ridicule the Democrat position during his current tour of key states is not having an effect.

The argument is that Foleygate is drowning out the sound of his voice. With four weeks still to go, I believe that this is wildly optimistic. Not Foley nor Woodward nor the latest on Abramoff nor that Senate Intelligence Committee has found no evidence of links between the regime of Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda nor what temporary scandal may yet arise will erase the importance of the Iraq war in the minds of the voters.

Surely, then, the Republicans will fail because poll after poll shows the vast majority of electors believe the US is failing in Iraq?

Well, we are all guilty of focusing on the statistics that most support our case.

I am grateful to the Liberal blogger Frank Warner for pointing out that the Iraq war is not only popular but is getting more popular:

Many pundits refused to believe last week's Fox News-Opinion Dynamics poll that found 51 percent of Americans support the U.S. role in the Iraq war.

(Just two weeks earlier, CNN-Opinion Research had reported 61 percent opposed and only 35 percent favored "the U.S. war.")

Now the new USA Today-Gallup poll comes up with a finding similar to Fox News-Opinion Dynamics'. Gallup did not ask, "Do you support or oppose the U.S. war in Iraq?" as Opinion Dynamics did, but Gallup did ask:

In view of the developments since we first sent our troops to Iraq, do you think the United States made a mistake in sending troops to Iraq, or not?

49-49 split. To this question, 1,003 Americans on Sept. 15-17 answered 49 percent, yes, a mistake; and 49 percent, no, not a mistake.

It was the first time since December that a majority of Americans did not call the war a mistake. It was the first time since July 2005 that the "not a mistake" percentage was this high. (It was down to 39 percent last September.)

A bleak assessment for Democrats was made by the BBC Washington reporter Adam Brookes regarding their ability to profit from the Senate Intelligence Committee report:

It remains to be seen if the Democrats can use the Senate report to damage the Republican Party in the run-up to Congressional elections in November by reminding the American public of the intelligence debacle that preceded the invasion of Iraq, and ascribing that failure to the leadership of the Bush administration.

Sen Carl Levin said the report was damning

It is far from clear they'll be able to do so.

The president has been extremely active in the last week, selling his successes in the "war on terror" in a series of speeches; demanding Congress give him greater powers to fight it; and announcing that the alleged mastermind of the 9/11 attacks will be brought to trial.

The Democratic Party still seems unable to find a concerted critique of President Bush's handling of the "war on terrorism" and the conflict in Iraq, without themselves appearing defeatist.

What Frank Warner is pointing out is that the majority of American people know the Iraq policy is not working but they still want to win the war. For many, the Democrats appear to be saying it is not winnable and we need to get out. Only Bush is offering them what they want and he is making sure that this is what he is telling them in these last weeks before they go to the polls.

It is this confidence in his strategy which is putting a spring in Bush's step as he wanders across the US with his single messsage on Iraq.

If I were the Democratic leadership I would seize the initiative. I would call all current representatives and hopefuls off the campaign trail for a major one day conference in the national interest in Washington next week to undertake an emergency review of the disastrous news emanating from Iraq these past few weeks. At the end of it I would announce the list of failures of the current policy and offer full bi-partisan support in the interests of the country for a major review and change of strategy by the administration to support the men and women of our military in Iraq.

In this way, the clothes of the White House are stolen from what will occur in any case after Congress re-assembles, the withdrawal aspect of current Democratic policy is obfuscated until at least that review is completed, and the total failure and lack of current ideas of the present administration as to what to do about Iraq will be highlighted.

Of course, me being me, I would get out of Iraq damn fast. But, then, I am not seeking election. The American people are not ready for another defeat. I would not want them to think that only Bush offers them a means to avoid it. Without power, nothing will help our military out of the quagmire in which they are engaged. That power must belong to the Democrats for there to be real hope.