30k troops to leave iraq...?

[DwightSchrute]

SOURCE

Officials: U.S. hopes to pull 30,000 troops
Rumsfeld, Rice visit Iraq, encourage formation of government

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Gen. George Casey, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, has tentative plans to reduce U.S. troops levels in Iraq by about 30,000 by the end of the year, senior military officials said Wednesday.

Casey said he is still on his "general timeline" for recommending further U.S. troop reductions.

The officials said that Casey is considering reducing troop levels from 15 brigades to about 10 brigades. (Watch how the plan depends on the development of Iraq's army and government -- 2:03)

That would mean U.S. troop levels could be under 100,000 by year's end, officials said. About 160,000 U.S. troops were in Iraq in December, when security was tightened for the country's parliamentary elections. About 130,000 are in the country now.

Casey met Wednesday with U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who along with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was in Baghdad on an unannounced mission to show support for Iraq's move toward a new government.

The visit came a day after al Qaeda in Iraq leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi surfaced in a lengthy Web video scorning the coalition and the Iraqi government, and urging unity among militants. (Full story)

Roadside bombings, a tactic seen almost daily in Iraq, killed four civilians and wounded 15 others in central Iraq on Wednesday.

After meeting with Casey, Rumsfeld told reporters that "the question of our forces' levels here will depend on conditions on the ground and discussions with the Iraqi government, which will evolve over time."

Military officials familiar with troop-level planning told CNN that reductions would happen by attrition: Some units would not be replaced when they rotate home later this year.

The officials said the U.S. plan is to consolidate forces at several large "super-bases," to lower their profile and move them out of the line of fire.

The possibility of reducing troops in Iraq comes as some retired top military generals are openly expressing dismay at the way the administration has been conducting the war.
Rice praises prime minister-designate

Rumsfeld and Rice met with Iraqi Prime Minister-designate Nuri al-Maliki and urged Iraqi lawmakers to work pragmatically and in the spirit of compromise to get their government going.

Last week, Iraqi lawmakers broke an impasse over the selection of a prime minister when President Jalal Talabani designated al-Maliki, a Shiite, to the post. Since then, al-Maliki has decided to use his real name rather than Jawad al-Maliki, which he adopted while in exile. (Full story)

Rice said al-Maliki "talked about bringing back the trust between Iraqis and this government. That seems to me to be the right place to start."

Al-Maliki must present a new government to parliament by May 21. In the past, however, squabbling Iraqi lawmakers have missed other deadlines. It is conceivable that the parliament might reject the new government and prompt more delays.

Rice indicated that the prime minister-designate has personal qualities that could enable him to prevail in Iraq's prolonged political negotiations.

Rice praised al-Maliki as "totally candid about his views" and someone "who is going to be a unifier because he's known as somebody who stands on principle."

Rice described meetings with Iraqi and U.S. Embassy leaders as "very stimulating," enabling Rumsfeld and her to "take a look at the nexus between political and military issues because, after all, the security issues here have both a political and a military aspect."

Rice said she was optimistic about efforts to form a government. The preceding post-Saddam Hussein governing bodies "were all leading up to this moment," she said.

"It's a very hopeful sign to talk with Sunnis who are now very integrated into the political process, who have very senior roles in the new government," Rice said.

The United States believes a permanent government would provide the stability needed to restore law and order and defeat the insurgency, she said.

The insurgency "has to be defeated politically, not just militarily," she said, acknowledging that the "violence is not going to stop immediately."

Earlier this week, al-Maliki said he thinks U.S. troops could begin withdrawing in 18 months or less if his country's security forces get up to speed.He also promised to tackle the problem of militias, the armed groups thought to be fueling sectarian violence. (Full story)

The defense secretary, who flew to Baghdad on orders from President Bush, arrived in Iraq on a C-17 military transport. Rice arrived six hours later, flying in from Turkey.

At a news conference with Casey, Rumsfeld said Iraq is moving forward. "This is a sovereign country, and they are making impressive progress," he said.

"We now are moving through another important milestone -- the formation of a new government, a sovereign government of Iraq," Rumsfeld said.
Other developments

Discuss.


I think its just politically motivated...elections are in november...

[x42bn6]

It makes sense. The Iraqi government is being set up, albeit shakily, dodgily and violently, and is slowly descending into religious civil war, with rebel groups running around shooting people... Anyway, the US clearly does not want to be embroiled in such a situation, but they cannot pull out straight away.

Pulling out little by little is an election ploy, probably, but if they go back on this promise, the future President will take plenty of flak. But I think those 30,000 will be the happiest people in Iraq.*

[Laharl]

Personally I see the Iraqi government collapsing shortly after America pulls out, and the region being worst off than before.

[shimshimheyxD]

US sucks. Seriously, George Bush needs to get his head out of his ass.

They come to Iraq, get 2000++ marines killed. Trying to catch Nuclear Weapons and Saddam. They found no weapons, but found saddam. Saddam killed like 2024024034 people.. Yet, they put him on trial. Hell, a guy can kill 3 people in US and get executed. Next they try to reform iraq. Reforming a government.. Kinda reminds me of WW1 where US tried to spread democratic gov't. Anyways, Bush should have just got Saddam and left Iraq. Who cares about Iraq?

[Lizardbreath]

I see the government falling apart also. I also see that happening and having the Republican party fall apart shortly after.

[Jimbo]

Originally Posted by shimshimheyxD

US sucks. Seriously, George Bush needs to get his head out of his ass.

They come to Iraq, get 2000++ marines killed. Trying to catch Nuclear Weapons and Saddam. They found no weapons, but found saddam. Saddam killed like 2024024034 people.. Yet, they put him on trial. Hell, a guy can kill 3 people in US and get executed. Next they try to reform iraq. Reforming a government.. Kinda reminds me of WW1 where US tried to spread democratic gov't. Anyways, Bush should have just got Saddam and left Iraq. Who cares about Iraq?

U.S tried to spread democracy, to "contain" the spread of communism. Also, what the U.S is doing in iraq right now is completley wrong. I'm pretty sure the citezens of Iraq don't want democracy. They probably only know how to live in a totalitarian state of goverment, trying to put them in anything else would make things worse then it was before.

That's my opinion.



As for the 30k being pulled out, they will probably be happy, lucky them.

Edit- here i am talking about how i know how ever person in iraq feels/wants.. meh.

[Dark Blade]

How many complaints have we heard about Vietnam after we pulled out? None. Were they better off before or after we went in? Probably a little better, but not by a significant margin enough to corroborate what we're doing in Iraq is good.


Want to know what will stop the Iraq War? The election of a Democratic president. Just like in Vietnam, except visa-versa. That way, the Democrats can blame everything on the Republicans, instead of the Republicans pulling out of the war and saying, "Oops, we screwed up."


Oh well.

[Master.America]

Originally Posted by shimshimheyxD

Who cares about Iraq?

Oil tycoons.

Spleen, Seraph?

[Гражданин СССР]

Originally Posted by Seraph

How many complaints have we heard about Vietnam after we pulled out? None. Were they better off before or after we went in? Probably a little better, but not by a significant margin enough to corroborate what we're doing in Iraq is good.


Want to know what will stop the Iraq War? The election of a Democratic president. Just like in Vietnam, except visa-versa. That way, the Democrats can blame everything on the Republicans, instead of the Republicans pulling out of the war and saying, "Oops, we screwed up."


Oh well.

Good? US Imprialism and Globalism is not good, it is a selfish attempt by US to promote US interests. If you think that Bush administration cares about the Iraqie people or that they went in for any other reason then personal and imperialistic interests you are truly blind my friend. I am not saying that Saddam was good, I am saying that Saddam wasn't a puppet of US. Look at Afghanistan, you got a nice puppet set up in where and what is happening? The average Afghanies start having Nastalgic feelings for the times then the Soviet ran the place. You know those crazy evil communists who build all the Afghani roads, many museums, supplied electricty to the whole nation (electricity in Afghani capitol right now only one day a week), but hey now they got they got "freedom" too bad their economy that was already ****ty went into even deeper ****, too bad that the only way to survive for an average worker is to start growing opium. Same kind of thing is going to happen in Iraq if US has its way with that nation and it probably will. Its good that where is still Russia and China in UN Security Council purhapse the only two nations that are not currently US lackies.

Originally Posted by Jim Morrison

U.S tried to spread democracy, to "contain" the spread of communism. Also, what the U.S is doing in iraq right now is completley wrong. I'm pretty sure the citezens of Iraq don't want democracy. They probably only know how to live in a totalitarian state of goverment, trying to put them in anything else would make things worse then it was before.

That's my opinion.



As for the 30k being pulled out, they will probably be happy, lucky them.

Edit- here i am talking about how i know how ever person in iraq feels/wants.. meh.

Everybody can happily live in a democratic nation, democratic nations are powerful and stable look at what happened to Russian Federation after the fall of USSR. It is an increasingly more stable democratic nations in next ten years our GDP is predicted to be half that of US and living standards are improving with the new national projects. Now what needs to happen in Iraq is getting the west out and letting the democracy grow. West is too biased, their main priority is not to have a democratic Iraq its to have a democratic Iraq that will give them bases in the middle east and that will be strongly pro-US. The west doesn't want a democracy in Iraq that would look out for Iraqie interests, it wants a democracy that would look out for the western interests. If US and its buddies let go off Iraq and let the democracy take its course then the nation will stabilize and what the deaths of the Coalition soldiers will actually mean something, if not, then they died for nothing atleast nothing important.

[Snagg]

Corruption in Iraq is approximately $20 billion Canadian dollars. That's a lot worse than when Saddam was in power.

[Dark Blade]

Originally Posted by Гражданин СССР

Good? US Imprialism and Globalism is not good, it is a selfish attempt by US to promote US interests. If you think that Bush administration cares about the Iraqie people or that they went in for any other reason then personal and imperialistic interests you are truly blind my friend. I am not saying that Saddam was good, I am saying that Saddam wasn't a puppet of US. Look at Afghanistan, you got a nice puppet set up in where and what is happening? The average Afghanies start having Nastalgic feelings for the times then the Soviet ran the place. You know those crazy evil communists who build all the Afghani roads, many museums, supplied electricty to the whole nation (electricity in Afghani capitol right now only one day a week), but hey now they got they got "freedom" too bad their economy that was already ****ty went into even deeper ****, too bad that the only way to survive for an average worker is to start growing opium. Same kind of thing is going to happen in Iraq if US has its way with that nation and it probably will. Its good that where is still Russia and China in UN Security Council purhapse the only two nations that are not currently US lackies.

You assumed that I was arguing that what we're doing was right. You're an idiot.

[Гражданин СССР]

Originally Posted by Seraph

You assumed that I was arguing that what we're doing was right. You're an idiot.

I might have been confused by this:

Probably a little better, but not by a significant margin enough to corroborate what we're doing in Iraq is good.

Either way I stated my point on the broader issue of the whole Iraqie war and democracy in the middle east.