All troops out of Iraq by years end

[Mike Teezie]

Wow!

The news is still really new. I'll remain guardedly optimistic yet skeptical until the news develops.

[HarryPot]

Didn't he promised this a couple of years ago?

[leekohler]

Awesome. It'll be the best move for the country we've seen in a long time.

Originally Posted by HarryPot

Didn't he promised this a couple of years ago?

He did- but for those paying attention, we all knew it was not realistic.

[yg17]

Hopefully Afghanistan's next. I don't even know what the hell our objective there is, especially now that we got Bin Laden.

[ericrwalker]

Originally Posted by yg17

Hopefully Afghanistan's next. I don't even know what the hell our objective there is, especially now that we got Bin Laden.

...and then Libya and Uganda. Amazing, someone give this guy a Nobel Peace prize...oh wait they already did.

[mcrain]

Originally Posted by ericrwalker

...and then Libya and Uganda. Amazing, someone give this guy a Nobel Peace prize...oh wait they already did.

He should get another.

[WildGuess]

See: iTunes>Bee Gees>Jive Talkin'

[bradl]

Originally Posted by WildGuess

See: iTunes>Bee Gees>Jive Talkin'

I did. It showed me a picture of George W. Bush saying the words "Mission Accomplished".

BL.

[leekohler]

Originally Posted by WildGuess

See: iTunes>Bee Gees>Jive Talkin'

And when it happens, what you you say?

[184550]

The door is still wide open for Troops to stay as Trainers/ Advisors.

IMO, this is largely symbolic. The on-the-ground situation will hardly change.

[SwiftLives]

Originally Posted by NathanMuir

The door is still wide open for Troops to stay as Trainers/ Advisors.

IMO, this is largely symbolic. The on-the-ground situation will hardly change.

There's a fine line between being cynical and being realistic.

[184550]

Originally Posted by SwiftLives

There's a fine line between being cynical and being realistic.

I'm just pointing out that this is not a BFD.

[Lord Blackadder]

Originally Posted by NathanMuir

I'm just pointing out that this is not a BFD.

The fact that occupation troops are being drawn down to zero is a significant event. We didn't pack up and leave all at once, but it's a milestone nonetheless.

It's the symbolic end of an 11-year war. That is a "BFD".

[184550]

Originally Posted by Lord Blackadder

The fact that occupation troops are being drawn down to zero is a significant event. We didn't pack up and leave all at once, but it's a milestone nonetheless.

It's the symbolic end of an 11-year war. That is a "BFD".

IIRC, 'Mission Accomplished' was symbolic too.

[Peace]

Republicans are already saying its the wrong move even though all the candidates say we should leave ASAP. Go figure.

[leekohler]

Originally Posted by NathanMuir

The door is still wide open for Troops to stay as Trainers/ Advisors.

No- it isn't. Did you read the article?

Of the 39,000 troops in Iraq, only about 150, a negligible force, will remain to assist in arms sales.

Can you please explain to me why this is not a big deal?

[Peace]

Originally Posted by leekohler

No- it doesn't. Did you read the article?

That's troops Lee. You know how many "contractors" are in Iraq ?

[leekohler]

Originally Posted by Peace

That's troops Lee. You know how many "contractors" are in Iraq ?

Nope. How many?

[Lord Blackadder]

Originally Posted by NathanMuir

IIRC, 'Mission Accomplished' was symbolic too.

As always, milestone are only generally recognized in retrospect. There is no way to predict whether this intended "end" will be seen as such by posterity. Certainly, it is not the end of the story of our complex relationship with Iraq. But it may end up marking the end of the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

Bush's statement, on the other hand, has already become a target for ridicule -and justifiably so... yet his announcement itself could be considered another "BFD", since in many ways it publicly exposed the thinking of the Bush Administration.

I don't think you can find any but the most superficial equivalency between the two events. Obama didn't land on a carrier and announce it, for starters.

[184550]

Originally Posted by Peace

That's troops Lee. You know how many "contractors" are in Iraq ?

Admittedly a poor choice of words on my part.

Perhaps 'American backed/ controlled/ influenced trainers/ advisors' would have been better.

EDIT:

NYT-

Mr. Obama appeared to leave open the possibility of further negotiations on the question of military trainers. “As I told Prime Minister Maliki, we will continue discussions on how we might help Iraq train and equip its forces — again, just as we offer training and assistance to countries around the world,” he said. “After all, there will be some difficult days ahead for Iraq, and the United States will continue to have an interest in an Iraq that is stable, secure and self-reliant.”

EDIT II:

ABC News Blog-

TAPPER: Did you guys have any sort of estimate as to how many security contractors are going to be — are going to be left behind or will be in Iraq?

DENIS MCDONOUGH, DEPUTY NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: We have some estimates. I think it’s around 4(,000) to 5,000 security contractors and various forms of security, be that for site security. Remember, we have at least three diplomatic posts. We have a consulate down in Basra, we have a consulate up in Erbil, and then we have that embassy in Baghdad. And then obviously we’ll — we’re going to have our people driving around and everything else. So you guys see, even around here, that we have — everybody has their security details. We’re obviously continuing to negotiate this with the Iraqis, but we’ll make sure that we have the kind of presence that we need, both as it relates to their fixed-site security but also on their ability to move around and do their job.

[Peace]

Originally Posted by leekohler

Nope. How many?

At last count about 15,000

DoD contractors.

Mercenaries

[Lord Blackadder]

Originally Posted by NathanMuir

Perhaps 'American backed/ controlled/ influenced trainers/ advisors' would have been better.

I have not seen any evidence to suggest that trainer/advisors will be increased in numbers to replace combat troops. Have you?

I'm sure such people will be around for a much longer time than our own combat units. they will, of course, be present at the invitation of the Iraqi government. You can't quite say the same about our occupation force. Why is that a "BFD" if the departure of the combat troops is not?

[184550]

Originally Posted by Lord Blackadder

I have not seen any evidence to suggest that trainer/advisors will be increased in numbers to replace combat troops. Have you?

I'm sure such people will be around for a much longer time than our own combat units. they will, of course, be present at the invitation of the Iraqi government. You can't quite say the same about our occupation force. Why is that a "BFD" if the departure of the combat troops is not?

I never suggested that their numbers would increase.

[Ugg]

Originally Posted by NathanMuir

Admittedly a poor choice of words on my part.

Perhaps 'American backed/ controlled/ influenced trainers/ advisors' would have been better.

EDIT:

NYT-

EDIT II:

ABC News Blog-

It actually looks as though from what you posted, most will be non-military. Even if a few thousand 'trainers' remain in the country, it's a very small number in the big picture and that's a good thing.

[Lord Blackadder]

Originally Posted by NathanMuir

I never suggested that their numbers would increase.

Fair enough. And as my other arguments?