Military Envisions Longer Stay in Iraq (reality check)

[grytpype]

Source: Washington Post

Military Envisions Longer Stay in Iraq
Officers Anticipate Small 'Post-Occupation' Force

By Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, June 10, 2007; Page A01

BAGHDAD -- U.S. military officials here are increasingly envisioning a "post-occupation" troop presence in Iraq that neither maintains current levels nor leads to a complete pullout, but aims for a smaller, longer-term force that would remain in the country for years.

This goal, drawn from recent interviews with more than 20 U.S. military officers and other officials here, including senior commanders, strategists and analysts, remains in the early planning stages. It is based on officials' assessment that a sharp drawdown of troops is likely to begin by the middle of next year, with roughly two-thirds of the current force of 150,000 moving out by late 2008 or early 2009. The questions officials are grappling with are not whether the U.S. presence will be cut, but how quickly, to what level and to what purpose.

One of the guiding principles, according to two officials here, is that the United States should leave Iraq more intelligently than it entered. Military officials, many of whom would be interviewed only on the condition of anonymity, say they are now assessing conditions more realistically, rejecting the "steady progress" mantra of their predecessors and recognizing that short-term political reconciliation in Iraq is unlikely. A reduction of troops, some officials argue, would demonstrate to anti-American factions that the occupation will not last forever while reassuring Iraqi allies that the United States does not intend to abandon the country.

The planning is shaped in part by logistical realities in Iraq. The immediate all-or-nothing debate in Washington over troop levels represents a false dilemma, some military officials said. Even if a total pullout is the goal, it could take a year to execute a full withdrawal. One official estimated that with only one major route from the country -- through southern Iraq to Kuwait -- it would take at least 3,000 large convoys some 10 months to remove U.S. military gear and personnel alone, not including the several thousand combat vehicles that would be needed to protect such an operation.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/09/AR2007060901464.html

---

This is a must-read reality check for everyone.

It will take a year to withdraw the troops, and that's if we start now.

[IndianaGreen]

1. The Soviets were not attacked when they high-tailed their asses out of Afghanistan

The Soviets were not attacked when they high-tailed their asses out of Afghanistan and neither will we when we do the same and get out of Iraq at a high rate of speed. Most of the equipment we can leave behind as a gift to our puppets in the Iraqi government. The equipment is in bad need of repairs and a lot of it is not salvageable.

This bullshit talk about a "residual force" that is unfortunately echoed by the likes of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, is nothing more than lowering the profile of the war and occupation. The killings and violence will continue for as long as we keep an imperialist footprint on Iraqi soil.

Ask the Israelis how well their 40-year occupation of Palestine has gone, and ask yourselves if you want American troops cast in the same role in Iraq that the IDF is in Occupied Palestine.

Consider what Dennis Kucinich has to say about Iraq, as opposed to the war wafflers we have running for President. Kucinich articulates the one position on Iraq that will bring this horrible and criminal war to an end, with no loose ends:

The best and fastest way to end the war in Iraq is to adopt my plan which is embodied in H.R. 1234. It's a plan to end the war in Iraq and it begins with an understanding that the insurgency in Iraq is being fueled by the United States occupation, and that once the US declares its intentions to withdraw US troops and close military bases, that's the point at which we can engage the world community.

Source: Virtual Town Hall on Iraq, sponsored by MoveOn.org Apr 10, 2007

http://www.ontheissues.org/Archive/MoveOn_Town_Hall_2007_Dennis_Kucinich.htm

[onehandle]

2. No shit.

DUer's who think that a Democrat will be able to pull all of our troops out of Iraq on the day they are sworn in needs to look to the magic pixie party for what they want.

This includes Kucinich.

[IndianaGreen]

3. That kind of thinking will keep us in Iraq for years to come, turning Iraq into a Democratic war

and morphing our Democratic President into another war criminal.

Give up your lust for Iraq's oil, stop trying to impose your phony "freedom and democracy" on everyone else, and cease using our troops as proxies for Israel.

BTW, as long as Iraq is sucking out all of our money and human resources down the drain, there won't be any money for any of the social programs that our Democratic candidates are promising to the voters. Put that in your pipe and smoke it!

[EVDebs]

11. Quakers put this on their weblink...and then got spied on by Mil Intell

http://www.fcnl.org/iraq/bases.htm

14 Permanent bases and a huge embassy spell 50 year presence to take oil. We need a policy change asap but can't even discuss this publicly.

[IndianaGreen]

12. The con is that they want to lower the profile of the war until it drops from the news

The killings and the sufferings will go on unabated, but the folks back at home will quickly forget Iraq as the watch the next season of American Idol and Dancing with the Stars.

[EVDebs]

16. True, but the con can't be sustained at its cost

Iraq War (sic - read Occupation) Cost
http://costofwar.com/

and, duh !,

Cost of Iraq war could surpass $1 trillion
Estimates vary, but all agree price is far higher than initially expected
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11880954/

Some have also said the cost could surpass $2 trillion. This is around 20% of a year's GDP...pissed down a rathole.

[0007]

4. Big Brother belives in the magic "pixie party"?

WAR IS PEACE

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

[rodeodance]

5. Military Envisions Longer Stay in Iraq

Source: wa post




Military Envisions Longer Stay in Iraq
Officers Anticipate Small 'Post-Occupation' Force

By Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, June 10, 2007; Page A01

BAGHDAD -- U.S. military officials here are increasingly envisioning a "post-occupation" troop presence in Iraq that neither maintains current levels nor leads to a complete pullout, but aims for a smaller, longer-term force that would remain in the country for years.

This goal, drawn from recent interviews with more than 20 U.S. military officers and other officials here, including senior commanders, strategists and analysts, remains in the early planning stages. It is based on officials' assessment that a sharp drawdown of troops is likely to begin by the middle of next year, with roughly two-thirds of the current force of 150,000 moving out by late 2008 or early 2009. The questions officials are grappling with are not whether the U.S. presence will be cut, but how quickly, to what level and to what purpose.


One of the guiding principles, according to two officials here, is that the United States should leave Iraq more intelligently than it entered. Military officials, many of whom would be interviewed only on the condition of anonymity, say they are now assessing conditions more realistically, rejecting the "steady progress" mantra of their predecessors and recognizing that short-term political reconciliation in Iraq is unlikely. A reduction of troops, some officials argue, would demonstrate to anti-American factions that the occupation will not last forever while reassuring Iraqi allies that the United States does not intend to abandon the country.

The planning is shaped in part by logistical realities in Iraq. The immediate all-or-nothing debate in Washington over troop levels represents a false dilemma, some military officials said. Even if a total pullout is the goal, it could take a year to execute a full withdrawal. One official estimated that with only one major route from the country -- through southern Iraq to Kuwait -- it would take at least 3,000 large convoys some 10 months to remove U.S. military gear and personnel alone, not including the several thousand combat vehicles that would be needed to protect such an operation.



Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/09/AR2007060901464.html?hpid=topnews

[sakabatou]

6. Great going, *

[seemslikeadream]

7. someone has to replace South Korea

I hear they want us out of there

[lpbk2713]

8. Goes to prove the BushCo regime is a pack of pathological liars.

They wouldn't recognize the truth if they tripped over it.

[Lerkfish]

9. Fallacy: because something is difficult means it should not be started immediately

I've heard a lot of arguments against withdrawal, but this one always slays me.
"It'll take a long time"

my answer: "Then we better get started NOW, in order to finish it on time".

such a bullshit justification, from bullshit people wanting to kill more and more innocent people for bullshit reasons.

[EVDebs]

10. De-fund the Occupation then. Where is this unauthorized action sanctioned ?

Not in the War Powers Resolution. And Congress hasn't approved this morphing of mission. The original mission is OVER, remember 'mission accomplished' ? So where has Congress approved a new authorization ? Simple, they haven't...even Sen Warner knows this.

[Enrique]

13. I don't believe the part about the troop reductions

they've claimed many times that troop reductions are going to happen "in the next year." The news story that reports the supposed plans always sounds like the one above.

[bvar22]

14. Military Envisions Longer Stay in Iraq?

No shit.
So do Hillary and Obama.
In fact, this closely mirrors what Pro-War Democratic candidates (Hillary and Obama) say they support.

bvar22's 9-Step Plan for ending the criminal occupation of Iraq:

Step 1: Immediately call a "Cease Fire. End ALL military operations TODAY.

Step 2: Withdraw ALL US Military personal to INSIDE bases with orders to fire ONLY if fired upon.

Step 3: Immediately expel ALL civilian security contractors TODAY.

Step 4: Give Sadam's Baghdad Palace (Green Zone) BACK to the Iraqis, immediately redeploy ALL US personnel to other US Bases for orderly withdrawal to the US.

Step 5: Declare ALL contracts signed with foreign corporations since the Invasion NULL & VOID, especially those that have privatized Iraqi assets.

Step 6: On bended knee, BEG the UN and neighboring Middle East countries to clean up the mess we made in Iraq and offer to fund stabilizing and rebuilding efforts by other countries with NO strings attached.

Step 7: Publicly announce the orderly withdrawal of ALL US Military forces from their bases.

Step 8: Pledge to hold those responsible for War Crimes accountable to the International community (ICC). Explore the possibility of indicting "Security Contractors" as War Criminals.

Step 9: Use the $Billions to fund Alternative Energy Independence & Conservation, International Law Enforcement, and Border and Port security to deal with Middle Eastern terrorism.

These 9 steps would be a good beginning, AND we could start TODAY!
All of our soldiers would be HOME in 90 days.

The only way to fix Iraq is to stop breaking Iraq!

Cheers.

[pretty_lies]

15. Please Explain How Edwards Is Different?

He is not distinguishable from Hillary and Obama on the war, as he would keep some troops there indefinitely.

By the way, your plan for ending the war could do with a little streamlining. I've got it down to two steps:

1. All US troops get into vehicles and drive to Kuwait. Remaining US military materiel will serve as compensation paid to the Shiite regime that will emerge 15 minutes afterwards.

2. Everyone who enabled the war - Republicans, Democrats, journalists, bloggers, neocons, pundits - is tried for war crimes and mass murder.

[eridani]

17. Korea has a DMZ with a menagerie lion running through it

On one side of the line are all of our allies, and on the other side, all of their enemies. Where is Bush proposing to draw such a line in Iraq?