Rumsfeld given Iraq withdrawal plan

[Pryderi]

Rumsfeld given Iraq withdrawal plan
Plan calls for troops to begin pulling out after December elections

Friday, November 18, 2005; Posted: 11:17 p.m. EST (04:17 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The top U.S. commander in Iraq has submitted a plan to the Pentagon for withdrawing troops in Iraq, according to a senior defense official.

Gen. George Casey submitted the plan to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. It includes numerous options and recommends that brigades -- usually made up of about 2,000 soldiers each -- begin pulling out of Iraq early next year.

The proposal comes as tension grows in both Washington and Baghdad following a call by a senior House Democrat to bring U.S. troops home and the deaths of scores of people by suicide bombers in two Iraqi cities.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/11/18/iraq.plan/index.html

[skooooo]

1. What does this mean...

...within the context of what happened today in the House?

[Pryderi]

2. Republicans want to be re-elected

[54anickel]

Perfect timing. Do you suppose they at least let the General write

the plan himself when they demanded a plan before the weekend? Or did someone from Bushco write it for him?

[dargondogon]

17. Misunderestimated again!

Come November it'll be: War? What war? We gotta do something about all these missing white chicks on the cable news programs. Them Repubs will help them out.

[dweller]

3. hopefully it means

that the congresscritters will have to eat some words and deeds soon, as the military in command have spoken to bring the troops home as exactly expressed by Murtha.

just my take.
dp

[skooooo]

5. Murtha is tight with the brass...that's for sure.

One of the callers on CNN pointed out that Murtha wouldn't have gone off like this if he didn't have support from the military. That's what's happening, imo. Too bad the House had this debate before this plan was submitted.

[dweller]

8. maybe they were waiting for

the sham of a debate to supposedly take place.

a sham did, a debate didn't, so they spoke up.

dp

[dargondogon]

15. Murtha gave Bush the cover he needed

That's the problem with Bush. Everything works out in his favor.

[skooooo]

24. Fat lady hasn't sung yet....

[bemildred]

4. It means the generals are sending Dumbsfailed a message. nt

[Pryderi]

9. It's a military coup?

[bemildred]

23. Nah. More like bureaucratic maneuvering.

There will be no coup in the USA unless things get much worse than they are now.

[Spazito]

6. My, my, my, how coincidental a news article would just happen

to be published with this 'news'. I am SURE the raging debate on this very issue didn't cause the propaganda team to work overtime to produce this little goodie.

:sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[dargondogon]

16. With Murtha now a "liberal,"

Bush has political maneuring room to do what he intended to do since before the election: withdraw the troops more slowly than the "liberals" want, but still withdraw. That's what sucked about the last election: voters thought Kerry would cut and run, but it was Bush who really intended to.

[Spazito]

18. LOL, actually this makes the repubs look even more pathetic

because it is so obvious they still don't have a plan but they sent out the meme there is a secret one out there. A secret one with LOTS of options, lol. Now that is a plan, alright. Pick which shell has the pea under it and we all know the pea isn't under any of them.

[dargondogon]

26. Bush has had a withdrawal plan all along. Hold elections, leave

He has openly communicated the plan, but Democrats can't hear it, therefore haven't called him on it. Someone should say: Of course Mr. Bush will abandon this mission before it is finished. Iraq will hold elections, Mr. Bush will declare victory after one of those elections, and the troops will come home.

[IowaGuy]

27. I think that option was open for awhile....

but isn't now that Murtha has pressed the point. Bush and his idolatrous minions are now boxed into a corner where the only possible way for them to be able to leave is if there is no civil war going on, if there is no terrorism going on, if the IRAQi sham govt' can actually stand on its own. It doesan't take a rocket scientist to see that isn't going to happen in the very near future - if at all.

By Murtha pressing the point, Bush now does not really have an out. To just declare victory and leave while there is still civil war occuring and terrorist activities are still occuring (we will still be getting shot at as we leave, no different than Nam)..will just be too transparently phony - he no longer has the trust of enough of the American people to pull that off.

This is paradoxically both good and bad. Bush will get stuck with this fiasco for all history-good. Democrats will undoubtably, (and we've already seen this happening), make significant political gains in holding various government offices - good. Sadly, more will die as Bush needlessly flails impotently about trying to maintain the course that he is trapped in to try and prove himself-bad!!!!

[Spazito]

28. Actually, I don't believe he has a 'withdrawal plan' at all

What the bush admin has is a temporary draw-down plan to coincide with the 06 elections and the temporary draw-down plan will be, in reality, an illusion. If one watches carefully the way the troop numbers are played, for example, headlines say 20,000 more troops sent in for the election and then, lo and behold, the next headline says 15,000 are being sent home with no mention it is 15,000 of the additional 20,000 therefore they have actually increased the number of troops while misleading the public into believing they are reducing them. That is their 'draw-down plan', imo.

*The numbers I used in my example are only used to clarify and not actual troop numbers.

[sofa king]

7. They'll leave when it's less profitable for them to stay.

[shawn703]

10. Defense official: Rumsfeld given Iraq withdrawal plan (CNN)

The top U.S. commander in Iraq has submitted a plan to the Pentagon for withdrawing troops in Iraq, according to a senior defense official.

Gen. George Casey submitted the plan to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. It includes numerous options and recommends that brigades -- usually made up of about 2,000 soldiers each -- begin pulling out of Iraq early next year.

The proposal comes as tension grows in both Washington and Baghdad following a call by a senior House Democrat to bring U.S. troops home and the deaths of scores of people by suicide bombers in two Iraqi cities.


more...
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/11/18/iraq.plan/

[ticapnews]

11. Why does General Casey hate America?

He has weakened America and given aid and comfort to the enemy. What a traitor! He must resign his commission and report to Fort Leavenworth, pending charges for treason...

:sarcasm:

[serryjw]

12. Lose of lives, money and

hatred around the world. What the hell did we accomplish?

[shraby]

13. Notice! It was made public. Now Rummy

can't put it in the round file and keep it secret.

[MissMarple]

19. Right, it probably isn't the first time they've done this.

Now the generals know they have some political and popular support. What a sad commentary on our country and its' leadership.

[dargondogon]

14. And Repubs will win the 2006 elections ...

Misunderestimated again!

[DoYouEverWonder]

22. Well it's easy to win

when you can manipulate the tally with proprietary machines.

[54anickel]

29. That's the sam Casey statement from July-August that Bush slapped

down.

Bush slaps down top general after he calls for troops to be pulled out of Iraq

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/08/14/wirq14.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/08/14/ixworld.html

The top American commander in Iraq has been privately rebuked by the Bush administration for openly discussing plans to reduce troop levels there next year, The Sunday Telegraph has learned.

President George W Bush personally intervened last week to play down as "speculation" all talk of troop pull-outs because he fears that even discussing options for an "exit strategy" implies weakening resolve.

Gen George Casey, the US ground commander in Iraq, was given his dressing-down after he briefed that troop levels - now 138,000 - could be reduced by 30,000 in the early months of next year as Iraqi security forces take on a greater role.

The unusual sign of US discord came as Iraqi politicians and clerics drafting a new constitution continued their own wrangling over autonomy demands by various factions.

more...


Then there's that whole question regarding "enduring" military bases

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/GH06Ak02.html

Hardly a day has gone by in the past few weeks without a new press report detailing the US military's plans to reduce its footprint in Iraq next year. First it was a leaked British memo saying that Britain would hand over southern Iraq to the Iraqis and the US would cut its troops in half. Then it was General George W Casey, the senior commander in Iraq, promising a "fairly substantial" US withdrawal by the summer of 2006. Finally, there was the announcement of a joint Iraqi-US committee to determine the "conditions" for a US exit.

The Bush administration, it would seem, is finally responding to pervasive anti-occupation sentiment in the US and Iraq. But the raft of announcements does little to address what many believe is a deeper problem - the Iraqi insurgency is likely being driven by fears that even once the large majority of US forces leave, enough will remain behind in permanent bases to allow the US to control Iraq's destiny.

snip>

Senator John Kerry, who introduced the idea into the national discourse during last fall's first presidential debate, restated it in a recent op-ed in the New York Times. "The president must ... announce immediately that the United States will not have a permanent military presence in Iraq," Kerry wrote. "Erasing suspicions that the occupation is indefinite is critical to eroding support for the insurgency."

The proposal has also gained diverse support in policy circles. Larry Diamond, a former senior adviser to the Iraq Coalition Provisional Authority, recently wrote that the administration's refusal to declare it doesn't seek permanent military bases "has aroused Iraqi suspicions that we seek long-term domination of their country". And Anthony Cordesman of the conservative Center for Strategic and International Studies, regarded as the dean of Middle East strategic studies by the Washington establishment, said in recent testimony to the Senate that the administration should "make it clear that the US and Britain will not maintain post-insurgency bases in Iraq".

Bases built to last
It is an open question whether or not the Bush administration will be willing to give Iraqis the type of guarantee being called for. Any serious withdrawal is a long way off since, by most accounts, Iraqi troops are far from ready to take over from the US. Incoming head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Peter Pace, informed Congress on June 29 that a recent classified Pentagon report had concluded that only "a small number" of Iraqi troops could fight the insurgency unassisted. And many analysts feel that the administration wants to keep a presence in Iraq irrespective of Iraqi military preparedness in order to safeguard America's larger strategic interests in the region (chiefly oil).

more...

[TheGunslinger]

20. I guess those elections are going to magically stop all attacks

Is the U.S. going to pullout and leave the terrorists to their new haven?



:eyes:

[NeoConsSuck]

21. Read the fine print..

at the extreme bottom of the CNN article:

The plan, which would withdraw a limited amount of troops during 2006, requires that a host of milestones be reached before troops are withdrawn.

Top Pentagon officials have repeatedly discussed some of those milestones: Iraqi troops must demonstrate that they can handle security without U.S. help; the country's political process must be strong; and reconstruction and economic conditions must show signs of stability.

So, in other words, let us finish building our permanent military bases, let Halliburton rape the american taxpayer for a few more years, and let a corporate friendly government gain power in Iraq, and we'll start to think about leaving.

[54anickel]

25. That's the same old tired "out" they've been using all along to "stay

the course". Where's plan B should those milestones be unobtainable? Let's face it those are some pretty lofty goals there. Not a lot of real progress being made in any of those areas. Then again, that's what makes them perfect goals for this mal-admin. They are just as immeasureable as they are unobtainable. They are "ly-able", "skirtable" just like everything these creatures are involved in.

[cal04]

30. American plan for first troop withdrawals within month

AMERICAN commanders of the war in Iraq have drawn up a bold plan to start pulling troops out of the country after elections next month. The plan, which has been submitted to Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, calls for more than 60,000 troops — over a third of the total — to leave by the end of next year.

According to US television reports this weekend, the total number left in Iraq would fall from 161,000 to what defence experts call the “magic number” of below 100,000. The Pentagon refused to confirm the proposals last night but a senior Ministry of Defence source said they appeared to “match our own plans” for a phased withdrawal under which most British troops will have left Iraq by the end of 2006. Officials expect UK numbers to be cut by 5,000 from the current level of close to 8,500. President George W Bush said in South Korea yesterday that American forces would “stay in the fight until we have achieved the victory our brave troops have fought for”. But he added that strategy would be “driven by the sober judgment of our military commanders on the ground”.

General George Casey, the US commander in Iraq, told Congress in September that the large US military presence was fuelling the insurgency. It “feeds the notion of occupation”, he said, and “extends the amount of time it will take for Iraqi security forces to become self-reliant”. The plan he has drawn up with General John Abizaid, commander of US forces in the region, envisages the number of troops falling to 138,000 soon after the December 15 election — a drop of 23,000.

One or two battalions — about 2,000 troops at a time — could then begin pulling out in January if the elections to form a new government prove successful. The withdrawal would continue throughout the year, beginning slowly. The plan was intended to remain secret until after the voting out of concern that Iraqis would think America was preparing to cut and run. But Pentagon and military officials decided to go public after a week of political infighting.



http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1880085,00.html