The Pentagon has been conducting its own review, and the White House has also commissioned a sweeping government-wide reassessment of US policy in Iraq, amid soaring sectarian violence and fears of all-out civil war.

"There's a lot of speculation that these reports in Washington mean there's going to be some kind of graceful exit out of Iraq. We're going to stay in Iraq to get the job done, so long as the government wants us there," said Bush.

"This business about 'graceful exit' just simply has no realism to it at all. We're going to help this government," said the US president, under heavy pressure at home to overhaul his strategy in the nearly four-year old war.

The bipartisan Baker-Hamilton commission -- created by the US Congress and officially known as the Iraq Study Group -- will call on Bush in its report to order a measured withdrawal of US forces from Iraq, US media said.

The New York Times reported that the panel agreed to recommend withdrawing 15 US combat brigades in Iraq -- the bulk of the US fighting presence -- but leaving 70,000 or more American trainers, logistics experts and members of a rapid reaction force. The recommendations are not binding.

The United States currently provides the vast majority of the 160,000-strong multinational force in Iraq.

The group did not say where the troops would go, and did not present a withdrawal timetable, which Bush has opposed. But it made clear that the US military commitment should not be open-ended.

Asked when Bush would reach a decision on implementing the advice, US national security adviser Stephen Hadley told reporters: "It's going to be weeks rather than months" but offered no further details.

"I look forward to hearing their recommendations. I want to hear all advice before I make my decisions about adjustments to our strategy and tactics in Iraq to help this government succeed," Bush said in Jordan.

At the same time, Maliki told ABC television that Iraqi forces will be ready to take charge of security in the country in June 2007.

"I can say that Iraqi forces will be ready, fully ready, to receive this command and to command its own forces, and I can tell you that by next June our forces will be ready," Maliki said, speaking through a translator.

Maliki and Bush also ruled out partitioning Iraq.

Bush, wounded by November 7 elections in which his Republicans lost control of the US Congress to opposition Democrats, has also signaled resistance to another likely piece of advice: direct talks with Syria and Iran.

Democrat Joseph Biden, expected to be the next chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said talks with Iraq's neighbors were only a starting point.

"Bringing the neighbors in and starting to get our troops out are necessary, but not sufficient," he said.

"I'm concerned the Iraq Study Group may miss the most important point: the need for a strategy to build a sustainable political settlement in Iraq," he said.

Senator Carl Levin, in line to chair the Senate Armed Services Committee, said US moves toward withdrawal will alleviate the violence in Iraq, contrary to Bush's assessment.

"I believe the announcement of a date to begin the redeployment of US forces from Iraq would increase the pressure on Iraqis to reach the political settlement that is essential to ending the sectarian violence," he said.

Separately, former US president Bill Clinton, who has been interviewed privately by the Iraq Study Group, told CNN television that "some redeployment" was necessary but warned that setting a withdrawal timetable will reduce US leverage on neighboring countries and on Iraqi leaders to help quell the violence.

USA Inc is conducting a voluntary recall of both these products as a safety measure due to the identification of several small problems by our company's quality control team.

In Afghanistan, shortfalls in manufacturer supervision mean that the Yee-Ha merchandise has become contaminated by foreign substances, including remnants of Taliban. As a result, there is a strong possibility that this product may dilute beyond recognition or spontaneously combust under certain operating conditions. Other likely side effects include electricity shortages, school closures, forced marriages, underage brides, women-whipping, widespread poverty, attacks by tribal militias, systemic corruption, a raging heroin trade, escalating warfare, increased suicide bombings, beard length policing and the arrest of kite fliers.

USA Inc apologises for any inconvenience.

Affected customers are asked to sit tight and continue enduring specious Western grandstanding about constitutions, parliamentary elections and well-dressed presidents. Reminding us that these democratic trappings have become little more than a tokenistic facade, that Afghanistan has seen a four-fold increase in violence in the past year and that a vital opportunity for nation-building has been squandered will not be appreciated.

The good news vis-a-vis Iraq is that no traces of peanuts have been identified in the Sucked In Saddam stock to date. USA Inc is pleased to report that incidents of allergy-related anaphylactic shock probably aren't occurring more frequently in Iraq than anywhere else.

A number of other issues, however, have been brought to our firm's attention.

USA Inc acknowledges that structural cracking in the police, media and justice components of this commodity may be contributing to poor democratic performance and - of particular concern to head office - oil leaks. The Sucked In Saddam brand has also been found to contain fragments of glass, gravel, exploded cars and body parts, as well as presenting a choking (and pink misting) hazard to children.

Other unexpected side effects may include hostage-taking, fundamentalist rampages, torture, staggering daily body counts and all-out civil war. Once again, sorry about that.

If you've had contact with the affected product, simply contact USA Inc on one of our toll-free phone lines, quote the relevant bar code number and wait for your full, no-strings-attached refund.

Ha. Just joking. As you've probably guessed, the only way we can weasel out of this one is to suggest that you, the Iraqi customer, are to blame. We have, therefore, decided to ignore accusations that the culprit here is actually our hubris, short-sightedness and failure to plan an exit strategy by stamping a best-by date on our product's lid.

After all, despite extensive publicity campaigns, most of you Iraqis have ignored the detailed instructions accompanying your Sucked In Saddam shipment.

This is obvious from your stubborn failure to have hidden weapons of mass destruction, your self-centred refusal to welcome US soldiers as liberators and your antisocial insistence on blowing up your neighbours in the aftermath of our stock's arrival.

Like certain conservative American media commentators, we here at USA Inc are sick to death of hearing about squabbling Shi'ites, Sunnis and Kurds, and your country's overall lack of gratitude to us for freeing you from the clutches of Saddam.

Don't bother pointing out that even the vile mustachioed one was better at imposing law and order and delivering basic utilities than we have been.

Caveat emptor is the relevant proverb here. (Oh, OK, maybe the Latin for invaded beware would be more accurate, but we're a busy company and don't have time for trivial matters such as foreign languages, foreign nuances and foreign histories of entrenched sectarian violence.)

Once again, thank you for your attention and - provided you manage to sort out this silly mess you've got yourselves into - we hope to liberate you at USA Inc again soon.

But the deployment, announced by Pentagon officials, came on the heels of new political ferment in Baghdad, continuing violence in Iraqi streets, and a conflicting message about Washington's confidence in Maliki that may have led to a temporary postponement of his meeting with Bush.

In Baghdad, the fragility of Maliki's situation was underscored when Iraqi legislators and cabinet ministers loyal to the anti-American cleric Moktada al- Sadr suspended their participation in the Parliament and government to protest the Amman meeting. The move was seen as a step to paralyze the government and make Sadr's influence clear.

And the confidence of the United States in Maliki was called into question when The New York Times printed the text of a memo from a top White House adviser expressing doubts about the prime minister's ability to rein in the sectarian violence.

The memo, by the national security adviser, Stephen Hadley, said of Maliki that while "his intentions seem good," conditions on the streets of Baghdad suggested that "Maliki is either ignorant of what is going on, misrepresenting his intentions, or that his capabilities are not yet sufficient to turn his good intentions into action."

The president, who was accompanied by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice after a NATO summit meeting in Latvia, was originally to have met with Maliki both Wednesday and Thursday. But the first day's session was put off with little notice, and some reports suggested that this was because of the Iraqi leader's fury over the release of the Hadley memo.

The two leaders had been set to explore ways to quell violence, which has surged recently after nearly a year of steadily rising intensity and steadily spreading geographic scope. Some analysts fear that, unless strong measures are taken, it could tip beyond the U.S. ability to maintain even rough control.

"We will discuss the situation on the ground in his country, our ongoing efforts to transfer more responsibility to the Iraqi security forces, and the responsibility of other nations in the region to support the security and stability of Iraq," Bush said Tuesday in Riga.

"We'll continue to be flexible, and we'll make the changes necessary to succeed. But there's one thing I'm not going to do: I'm not going to pull our troops off the battlefield before the mission is complete," he said.

Bush is also expected to ask Sunni Arab leaders to help in Iraq by pressing Sunni insurgents to lay down weapons.

Both leaders face increased international and domestic pressure to find solutions. Bush is awaiting the results of both an independent review and an administration study of options for Iraq.

Meanwhile, Pentagon officials are planning to boost the U.S. troop level in Iraq by sending another 3,500 soldiers to Baghdad to help restore security there, Defense Department officials said Wednesday.

The increase has not been formally approved by the Bush administration, but the decision could be made in the coming weeks and the first of the additional troops may begin arriving in Iraq early next year.

The additional forces are likely to come from four reserve combat engineer battalions in the United States, though planners have not notified the units that would be sent, the officials said. Sending more engineers to Baghdad would allow the building of more checkpoints, trenches and other measures aimed at limiting the movements of insurgents and sectarian militias.

But the units also bring additional combat power that would help make up for a shortfall in Iraqi troops in the capital, the official said. To further increase troop levels in Baghdad, a U.S. brigade equipped with fast-moving, armored Stryker vehicles is being shifted from northern Iraq to Baghdad, officials said.

In Baghdad, the pro-Sadr lawmakers boycotting the government said that they would resume participating on two conditions: that the Iraqi government be given more oversight over security forces, and that it improve services to the people.

Sadr controls one of the biggest blocs of seats in Parliament; last week he reiterated his claim that the American presence was the root cause of the rising violence in Iraq. Maliki, a conservative Shiite, relies on Sadr for political support against Shiite rivals.

In Amman, there were signs that the U.S. president would be greeted with a decidedly blunt message. Slogans on banners condemned American hegemony; details of a possible march were being worked out, and DVDs of a British movie depicting the fictional assassination of Bush sold briskly.

Bush's arrival in Amman was also overshadowed by the publication of the Hadley memo.

The leak of the sensitive secret document was seen by some as an attempt to goad Maliki into taking more dramatic steps to achieve reconciliation, disarm militias and bring calm - or else to begin laying blame should the United States decide to leave.

One senior analyst, Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, in Washington, questioned whether that approach would be fruitful. "It is not frankly meaningful," he said, "to try to blame the Iraqi government for the problems that exist today."

The White House has not disputed the contents of the Hadley memo but suggested that, taken in its entirety, it reflected confidence in Maliki.

Before departing Riga, Latvia, the White House spokesman, Tony Snow, said that Bush had confidence in Maliki and that the administration was working with him "to improve his capabilities in terms of dealing with the fundamental challenges in Iraq" including security. A draft report by an U.S. bipartisan commission that is studying new strategies for Iraq will urge the United States to open direct talks with Iran and Syria, according to U.S. officials who have seen all or part of the document. Its report is expected by mid-December.

The administration review will include Pentagon input from a team headed by General Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He declined to offer details Wednesday, except to say, "We are looking at the whole spectrum of possible military actions."

Privately, Cordesman, a respected former Reagan administration official, recently completed a review of the options available to the U.S.-led coalition.

The situation in Iraq, he concluded is still fixable. But, he cautioned, there are no silver bullets. The odds are that no combination of these options can prevent a serious further deterioration of the situation. People should think about progress over the coming three to five years, he said, not the next 18 to 24 months - and only if the United States remains willing to pay the high costs of the war there.

Pace also dismissed reports that the U.S. military had decided to give up on the troubled western province of Anbar while shifting troops to Baghdad.

The political stage for the meeting, hosted by Jordan's King Abdullah because Baghdad itself was deemed too dangerous, was set yesterday in the bluntest of terms by the memo from the US National Security Adviser, Stephen Hadley. It portrays Mr Maliki as either ignorant or mendacious, either unable or unwilling to take the tough measures necessary to restore stability.

The leak to The New York Times of the five-page document in its entirety may or may not have been a deliberate move by the White House. But it came as Washington's entire strategy in Iraq seemed to be unravelling, with America's patience all but exhausted at the sight of US troops trapped in what amounts to a civil war.

It sets out what the Bush administration expects the Iraqi government to do and what steps the US might take to help the Prime Minister ­ in whom, officials say, Washington still has confidence.

But the undeclared message is more sombre: that time is running out, as Republicans as well as Democrats increasingly conclude that Iraq is a lost cause and the war no longer worth fighting. The summit has thus taken on the character of a last chance before the bipartisan Iraq Study Group releases its long-awaited proposals for an exit strategy in seven days time.

Mr Hadley does not mince his words about Mr Maliki. The Iraqi Prime Minister, he says, "impressed me as a leader who wanted to be strong, but was having difficulty figuring how to do so". His intentions " seem good", but the bloody reality in Baghdad suggested the Prime Minister was "either ignorant of what is going on, misrepresenting his intentions, or that his capabilities are not yet sufficient to turn his good intentions into action."

In Amman, confusion reigned, as Mr Maliki failed to attend a scheduled threeway dinner with King Abdullah and Mr Bush. Iraqi officials said he opposed the King's efforts to broaden the agenda to the Israeli-Arab conflict. Others saw his absence as a retort to the deeply embarrassing memo.

But the weakness of Mr Maliki was brutally underlined yesterday as parliamentarians and ministers loyal to the anti-American Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr temporarily at least pulled out of the ruling coalition in Baghdad in protest at the Amman summit, saying it was "provocative and against the will of the Iraqi people".

In Washington, reports abounded of a major reorganisation of the 145,000-strong US troop presence that would send more units to Baghdad, where a reduction in violence is essential if the country is to be stabilised.

The Pentagon last night dismissed an ABC News report that US forces may abandon Anbar province, the heartland of Sunni resistance, where 20,000 Marines are tied down trying to contain the insurgency.

* Condoleezza Rice, the US Secretary of State, is visiting the Middle East today for talks with Palestinian and Israeli leaders.Her trip appears to be a response to Arab allies, who say a new US push for a Palestinian-Israeli settlement is essential if the region's interlocking crises are to be tackled.

Pressure to keep spending under control can lead to cuts in both current maintenance and future weapons, Cohen says, but "the longer we defer on that, the more expensive it's going to be."

The Pentagon needs $50 billion to $60 billion to re-equip and restore units returning from Iraq, says Leon Panetta, the former Clinton White House chief of staff and member of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group.

On Monday, the Pentagon said it had issued more than $1.7 billion in equipment repair and replacement contracts during November alone. This summer, the leaders of the Army and Marine Corps said their services rack up a combined $23 billion a year in repair costs.

Army Gen. Peter Schoomaker and Marine Gen. James Conway told Congress that repair money comes only in special requests for war funding, not in annual budgets. That, they said, makes it hard to plan for future needs.

"They've been falling badly behind," says Winslow Wheeler, a former congressional budget analyst now at the independent Center for Defense Information.

The Pentagon is considering $127 billion to $160 billion in requests for war funding next year.

Vehicles and other equipment are far more complex now than they were in previous conflicts such as Vietnam, making repairs and replacements even more expensive, Wheeler says. The Congressional Research Service says the entire Vietnam War cost an estimated $650 billion in today's money, while the global war on terrorism, including Iraq, has cost more than $500 billion so far.

The Army and Marines have reported using about 40% of their ground combat equipment in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to the Government Accountability Office (GAO). Units departing Iraq leave much of their heavy equipment behind, which further delays major maintenance and leaves holes in training for future missions, the report says.

A separate GAO report this month urged the incoming Democratic-controlled Congress to investigate the Pentagon's planning for repair, maintenance and replacement of war equipment.

If the United States entered another war, "it would be difficult for us to accomplish anything," says retired lieutenant general Donald Kerrick, who served on the National Security Council under presidents Clinton and Bush.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has acknowledged the problem and said he is working with the White House to get more money for repairs.

"I think we have some reasonable understandings about the coming year and the importance of not having a two- or three-year lag," Rumsfeld said last month.

- Charities such as Bake Sales for Body Armor, Soldiers' Angels and Operation Helmet, a favorite of singer Cher, have sprung up to provide some gear, though not heavy equipment.

Bush offered him strong backing in their talks and said Iraqi forces would be trained more quickly to take over but rejected suggestions he was seeking a "graceful exit" for U.S. troops.

According to a transcript released by ABC, the Iraqi leader said: "At the beginning of next year we will increase the training of our forces ... when they reach an acceptable level, we can talk about transferring power from multinational forces to Iraqi forces.

"I can say that Iraqi forces will be ready, fully ready to receive this command and to command its own forces, and I can tell you that by next June our forces will be ready."

Bush: U.S., Iraq agree to speed security responsibility handover

U.S. President George W. Bush said Thursday that he and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki have agreed to speed a turnover of security responsibility to Iraqi forces, but that U.S. troops would remain in the country as long as needed to strengthen the prime minister's authority.

"One of his frustrations with me is that he believes that we've been slow about giving him the tools necessary to protect the Iraqi people," Bush told a press conference after the two met in the Jordanian capital.

"Today we had a meeting that will accelerate the capacity for the prime minister to do the hard work necessary to help stop this violence."

The two also agreed during the high-stakes talks that Iraq should not be partitioned into separate, semiautonomous zones.

"The prime minister made clear that splitting his country into parts, as some have suggested, is not what the Iraqi people want, and that any partition of Iraq would only lead to an increase in sectarian violence," Bush said after he and the Iraqi prime minister met for nearly two and a half hours.

While Bush continued to reject drawing Iran into helping Iraq in its struggle for peace, Maliki left the door open for countries like Iran and Syria to play a part.

Bush told Maliki that American troops would remain in Iraq "to get the job done so long as the government wants us there."

Their breakfast meeting coincided with reports that the Iraq Study Group will recommend that the U.S. military shift from a combat role to a support role in Iraq, and will call for a regional conference that could lead to direct U.S. talks with Iran and Syria, both accused by the United States of fomenting violence in Iraq.

A source familiar with the deliberations of the independent, bipartisan group said the idea was to shift U.S. combat forces to bases inside Iraq and elsewhere in the region over the next year or so. "It's basically a redeployment," the source said.

Bush had expected to meet Maliki on Wednesday, along with Jordan's King Abdullah, but found out on the way from Latvia where he attended a NATO summit that the Jordanians and Iraqis had decided a three-way gathering was unnecessary.

It had originally been billed as two days of meetings between Bush and Maliki aimed at strengthening the Iraqi leader as he grapples with an array of security, political and economic challenges gripping his country.

In the end, Abdullah met both leaders separately.

U.S. officials insisted the change had nothing to do with a memo by White House national security adviser Stephen Hadley that questioned Maliki's ability to control the turmoil in Iraq.

White House spokesman Tony Snow rejected any suggestion the Wednesday meeting had been called off as a snub to Bush.

"If you want to take the temperature of the president and the prime minister you'll have an opportunity to see them tomorrow," Snow told reporters late on Wednesday.

The memo said the Iraqi leader appeared to have good intentions, "but the reality on the streets of Baghdad suggests Maliki is either ignorant of what is going on, misrepresenting his intentions or that his capabilities are not yet sufficient to turn his good intentions into actions."

The memo, reported by The New York Times, was written after Hadley visited Iraq at the end of October.

Bush was informed on board Air Force One heading to Jordan that the Jordanians and Iraqis jointly decided they did not believe it was the best use of time to hold a trilateral meeting on Wednesday, and Bush agreed, a U.S. official said.

Six months ago, the United States said it would join European-led talks on Iran's nuclear programs if Iran agreed to halt uranium enrichment. Officials said at the time that they would give Iran "weeks, not months" to comply. But since Iran rejected the offer, the administration has engaged in difficult negotiations with Russia over the terms of a U.N. resolution to impose sanctions.

Until now, a key administration goal has been to keep the five nations on the Security Council that hold veto power, plus Germany, unified on the Iran issue. But Rice's remarks suggested that the administration's patience is waning and that officials could soon offer a resolution, daring Russia to veto it. Officials say they believe Russia would abstain instead, allowing passage of a resolution under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter.

Russia has strong business ties with Iran and is building a nuclear reactor in Bushehr, which it has sought to shield from the sanctions resolution.

"Obviously, we'd like to keep the unity of the P5-plus-one," Rice said, referring to the five permanent Security Council members and Germany, "but unity is not an end in itself. The goal is to get a resolution that makes sense in terms of convincing the Iranians that their behavior is not acceptable in the international community. We have to do something."

Rice, who is at this Jordanian resort to attend a conference on Arab democracy, devoted much of her day to trying to revive long-stalled peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians. Palestinian factions and Israel agreed this past weekend to a tenuous cease-fire in the Gaza Strip, and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert offered to release some Palestinian prisoners, reduce controls on the movement of people and goods in Gaza and the West Bank, and restart negotiations to create a Palestinian state.

Rice met first with the Palestinian Authority president, Mahmoud Abbas, in the West Bank city of Jericho before traveling to Jerusalem, where she met with Olmert and Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni.

In Jericho, Abbas announced that months of talks to establish a unity government had "unfortunately reached a dead end." The victory by the Islamic Resistance Movement, or Hamas, in legislative elections in January resulted in a cutoff of international aid, so Abbas, who heads the rival Fatah party, said the failure of the talks "is very painful for us because we know how badly the people have been suffering over the last nine months. All options are open, with the exception of civil war, which we will never accept."

Saeb Erekat, chief Palestinian negotiator and a Fatah legislator, said Abbas sought Rice's help on several issues. He asked her to work with Egyptian officials to support a so-far elusive exchange of hundreds of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails for Israeli army Cpl. Gilad Shalit, who has been held by Palestinian gunmen since late June.

Abbas also urged Rice to press Israeli officials to adhere to the terms of an agreement she helped broker last year governing the operation of the crossings between Israel and Gaza, Erekat said. Citing security concerns, Israel has kept the key cargo passages closed for much of the year.

He, however, expressed that experts from countries out of the U.S.-led coalition, which invaded Iraq, could be accepted for the court credibility.

On Thursday's session, the court heard a fourth American forensics expert, Michael Trimble of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers who submitted evidences about how he found the remains of hundreds of Kurdish women and children in three mass graves in northern and southern Iraq discovered since march 2003.

He said that in one of his excavations in a mass grave in northern Nineveh, he found a woman and her baby among bodies of 25women and 89 children, some of them were blindfolded and were shot with a bullet in the back of their heads.

Up to 301 corpses were found in the mass graves, including 183Kurdish children killed during late 1980s, Trimble said. "In all these graves, 90 percent of the children are less than13 years of age," he said.

Chief Judge Ureibi ordered the trial be adjourned until Monday. If convicted in the trial of Operation Anfal, Saddam could get his second death penalty following the first one he got from the trial of Dujail.