These look like the key recommendations:

"Given the ability of Iran and Syria to influence events within Iraq and their interest in avoiding chaos in Iraq, the United States should try to engage them constructively. In seeking to influence the behavior of both countries, the United States has disincentives and incentives available. Iran should stem the flow of arms and training to Iraq, respect Iraq's sovereignty and territorial integrity, and use its influence over Iraqi Shia groups to encourage national reconciliation. The issue of Iran's nuclear programs should continue to be dealt with by the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council plus Germany. Syria should control its border with Iraq to stem the flow of funding, insurgents and terrorists in and out of Iraq.

"The United States cannot achieve its goals in the Middle East unless it deals directly with the Arab-Israeli conflict and regional instability. There must be a renewed and sustained commitment by the United States to a comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace on all fronts: Lebanon, Syria and
President Bush's June 2002 commitment to a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine. This commitment must include direct talks with, by and between Israel, Lebanon, Palestinians — those who accept Israel's right to exist — and Syria.

"As the United States develops its approach toward Iraq and the Middle East, the United States should provide additional political, economic and military support for Afghanistan, including resources that might become available as combat forces are moved out of Iraq."

"The primary mission of U.S. forces in Iraq should evolve to one of supporting the Iraqi army, which would take over primary responsibility for combat operations.

Does anybody else get the feeling that "should" translates to "can't" or "won't"?

And does anyone notice that the only passage where the word "must" appears?

That's right. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict:

There must be a renewed and sustained commitment by the United States to a comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace on all fronts: Lebanon, Syria and
President Bush's June 2002 commitment to a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine. This commitment must include direct talks with, by and between Israel, Lebanon, Palestinians — those who accept Israel's right to exist — and Syria.

Funny! The Baker Commission is telling us that the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is the festering wound that's infecting everything else, including the Iraqi occupation. I thought only dirty hippies and peasants with pitchforks believed that.

Not so funny: How can anyone seriously believe that the administration has either the will or the ability to carry any of these ideas out? The Baker Commission report amounts to a fantasy of what outcomes would have been, had the adults been in charge. But they weren't, they aren't, and they won't be. (Nor should they be; shit, the voters elected President Shit Magnet, so, short of impeachment--hmmm--God's Chosen One is in the White House for the duration.)

Take the Israeli recommendatation. Fine words, but the Christianists will never stand for it. Think Bush--or the Republican Party--is going to sell out their last remaining base of support just to save a few thousand lives and some billions? Na ga happen.