Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Gen. Casey in Iraq outlines troop cuts? Isn't This 'Cut and Run'?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-25-06 07:27 AM
Original message
Gen. Casey in Iraq outlines troop cuts? Isn't This 'Cut and Run'?
:shrug:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/06/25/america/web.0626military.php

The top American commander in Iraq has drafted a plan that projects sharp reductions in the United States military presence there by the end of 2007, with the first cuts coming this September, American officials say.

According to a classified briefing at the Pentagon this week by the commander, Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the number of American combat brigades in Iraq is projected to decrease to 5 or 6 from the current level of 14 by December 2007.

Under the plan, the first reductions would involve two combat brigades that would rotate out of Iraq in September without being replaced. Military officials do not typically characterize reductions by total troop numbers, but rather by brigades. Combat brigades, which generally have about 3,500 troops, do not make up the bulk of the 127,000-member American force in Iraq, and other kinds of units would not be pulled out as quickly.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
thepurpose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-25-06 07:30 AM
Response to Original message
1. I thought we were staying the course? Or was that just last week
which we are supposed to forget about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
B Calm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-25-06 07:34 AM
Response to Original message
2. Now that they have an excuse, cons will blame the democrats
for losing Bush's stupid illegal invasion of Iraq and finally bring the troops home.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
doc mercer Donating Member (126 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-25-06 07:34 AM
Response to Original message
3. Iraq

Yep .... I posted the exact same question at another forum and was told basically by a
Bush Loyalist that it is not the same thing

What a bunch of lowlife POS the Bushies truly are
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
4dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-25-06 07:37 AM
Response to Original message
4. What exactly is "cut and run"??
Make the rethugs define "cut and run".. Then use it against them..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
droidamus2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-25-06 07:37 AM
Response to Original message
5. This is what I expected all along
Edited on Sun Jun-25-06 07:38 AM by droidamus2
I expected that the Bush/Repuglicans would have some kind of token draw-down of troops prior to the 2006 elections in an effort to boost their chances. I also suspect that the troop levels will go right back up after the election. As the general says, they will also pull the same stunt prior to the 2008 presidential election. They may actually get the troops pulled out as Bush will no longer need the war as he will be leaving office. Bushco/Rove see this war as nothing but a political tool.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-25-06 07:39 AM
Response to Original message
6. end of 2007, with the first cuts coming this September"- a political idea?
sure does seem shaped for the GOP for this election -

Wonder if our media will notice and actually report - perhaps via pundits - that this smells?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-25-06 07:43 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. It is actually mentioned further down in the article...
<snip>

Now, after criticizing Democratic lawmakers for trying to legislate a timeline for withdrawing troops, skeptics say, the Bush administration seems to have its own private schedule, albeit one that can be adjusted as events unfold. If executed, the plan could have considerable political significance. The first reductions would take place before this falls Congressional elections, while even bigger cuts might come before the 2008 presidential election.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hugin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-25-06 08:11 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. Wow!
Recognition of the truth!

Now, that's what I call an article.

BTW... Strangely enough the same article was appearing on AOL news.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-25-06 08:15 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. that is strange!
:crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-25-06 07:51 AM
Response to Original message
8. Our generals have told us there weren't enough troops in the first place
and their purpose for being there shifted from "We know where the weapons of mass destruction are" to "Saddam is a threat to the world and should be removed" to "We need to bring freedom to the Middle East" to several other permutations of the same dishonest smoke-and-mirrors versions to justify a war for oil.

Not enough troops and no good reason to be there.

And Don Rumsfeld's still at his desk.

I'd feel a lot better if U.S. foreign policy were being managed by President Kerry, President Gore, President Clark, President Feingold, President Boxer, President Edwards, President Kucinich, and so forth.

When brush-clearing is your most sterling accomplishment, you shouldn't be running U.S. foreign policy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
warrior1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-25-06 08:12 AM
Response to Original message
10. if it quacks like a duck
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
B Calm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-25-06 08:20 AM
Response to Original message
12. Who will operate the 14 enduring military bases in Iraq? Terrorists
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-25-06 08:23 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. apparently they have been pared down to four mega bases
and no doubt the plan includes leaving 50-60,000 US troops there to operate them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-25-06 08:27 AM
Response to Original message
14. semantics
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheCowsCameHome Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-25-06 08:31 AM
Response to Original message
15. Rove, Casey, Bush: Operation Save our Asses (OSA) has begun
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 09:30 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC