Log In | Register
19 Comments
PrintUS troops leave more security in hands of Iraqis
Wed Nov 12, 2008 3:21 AM EST
advertisement
The U.S. military in Iraq is abandoning — deliberately and with little public notice — a centerpiece of the widely acclaimed strategy it adopted nearly two years ago to turn the tide against the insurgency. It is moving American troops farther from the people they are trying to protect.
Starting in early 2007, with Iraq on the brink of all-out civil war, the troops were pushed into the cities and villages as part of a change in strategy that included President Bush's decision to send more combat forces.
The bigger U.S. presence on the streets was credited by many with allowing the Americans and their Iraqi security partners to build trust among the populace, thus undermining the extremists' tactics of intimidation, reducing levels of violence and giving new hope to resolving the country's underlying political conflicts.
Now the Americans are reversing direction, consolidating in larger bases outside the cities and leaving security in the hands of the Iraqis while remaining within reach to respond as the Iraqi forces require.
The U.S. is on track to complete its shift out of all Iraqi cities by June 2009. That is one of the milestones in a political-military campaign plan devised in 2007 by Gen. David Petraeus, when he was the top U.S. commander in Iraq, and his political partner in Baghdad, Ambassador Ryan Crocker. The goal also is in a preliminary security pact with the Iraqi government on the future U.S. military presence.
The shift is not explicitly linked to U.S. plans for increasing its military presence in Afghanistan, but there is an important connection: The logistical resources needed to house and supply a larger and more distributed U.S. force in Afghanistan have been tied up in Iraq. To some extent that will be relieved with the consolidation of U.S. forces in Iraq onto larger, outlying bases that are easier to maintain.
These moves coincide with priorities expressed by President-elect Obama during his campaign: reducing the U.S. military commitment in Iraq and putting more resources into Afghanistan. It also fits with Petraeus' view that a more robust counterinsurgency approach is needed in Afghanistan, meaning not only a larger number of troops but also getting them spread out into more villages.
But it also points up a major gamble in Iraq — namely, that the Iraqis are ready to handle the insurgency themselves.
Stephen Biddle, a senior fellow for defense policy at the Council on Foreign Relations and an occasional adviser to Petraeus, is among those who worry about the consequences of excluding U.S. forces from the cities.
"It gets us out of the way" should Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki decide to use Iraqi security forces to crush the U.S.-allied Sunni neighborhood militia groups who have been instrumental in attacking extremist elements of the insurgency, Biddle said in an e-mail exchange. Al-Maliki sees those militiamen, whom the U.S. has dubbed "Sons of Iraq," as an internal threat to Shiite political predominance.
Biddle said that on balance he believes the risks are more likely to outweigh the benefits of sticking to the June goal.
Retired Army Col. Peter Mansoor, who served as Petraeus' right-hand man in Baghdad during the U.S. troop buildup and has written a book, "Baghdad at Sunrise," about the counterinsurgency effort, also has misgivings. He said in an e-mail exchange Tuesday that his main concern is sectarian violence.
"Without U.S. forces in the cities, the Shiite and Sunni militias could once again take to fighting each other without an honest broker to keep the peace," he said. "The Iraqi army is not ready to play this role, in my view — not yet, anyway."
Ready or not, U.S. commanders are marching steadily in that direction — and not just in Baghdad.
Brig. Gen. Martin Post, deputy commander of U.S. forces in western Iraq, where the Sunni insurgency has sharply abated — if not almost disappeared — since 2007, said Monday his outfit is shutting down the U.S. base at Fallujah. The U.S. headquarters elements there are moving to al-Asad air base, a large but remote facility in the vast desert halfway between Fallujah and the Syrian border.
"There's been a big effort to move all the Marine forces out of the cities," Post said in a videoconference with reporters at the Pentagon. "And so as you go throughout, from Fallujah all the way up the Euphrates River Valley, up to al-Qaim — where we used to have Marines actually living in the cities — we've pulled them all out."
© 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
15 Votes- Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
Published to:
- Robert Burns's Column, All of Newsvine
- Groups: none
- Regions: United States , Syria , Iraq , Afghanistan
| U.S. Military to Abandon Iraqi Cities | Synthesis | Wed Nov 12 | 3 |
- Public Discussion (19)
What's this?
Who's leading the conversation?
This visualization below allows you to see the impact that each user
has on the current conversation.
The top row contains the group of users who have had the most impact, the 2nd
row the group of users who have had the 2nd most impact (et cetera).
Users with similar impact are grouped together, and the average score of the group
is shown to the left of the group. The author of the article is also shown on the
left, in their corresponding group.
Each user's score is based on the number of comments the user has made plus the
number of votes their comments have received. The scores are calculated relative
one another, so while their absolute value is not particularly important, their
relative difference does indicate a larger difference in impact on the conversation.
8.4
2.1
{"commentId":4028651,"authorDomain":"wallemalemon"}
"Without U.S. forces in the cities, the Shiite and Sunni militias could once again take to fighting each other without an honest broker to keep the peace," he said. "The Iraqi army is not ready to play this role, in my view — not yet, anyway."
.....could.....??? wow...there 'could' be problems... The 'military elites' are in fear of allowing the people of Iraq their own self-determination. The skewed perspectives, with origins within the 'american interests' department of RTFTE (remove Truth From the Equation) seek to frame our military's standing down as an abandonment. This is not objective journalism. The fourth estate is subjugated to 'new rules' in ethics. Deny, deny, deny...I don't hesitate to suspect that what inspired the use of the term, 'abandoned' to be selfish, unless the boys have taken on Iraqi lovers, and fear the repurcussions involved in abandoning them...
We've been asked to leave by the Iraqi people since mission accomplished. Their elected leader has repeatedly, very politely requested the very same thing. This foot-dragging, let me freely speculate; 'American interests INC' cannot find a way to benefit from their doing so. It is a wanted fear, that Iraq cannot survive without our presence. I freely speculate they've found reasons that must remain 'classified'...
...meanwhile, the abandonment issue gets little press, in regards to how the administration INC has been found guitly in the hearts of most all Americans.
{"commentId":4028651,"threadId":"416710","contentId":"2102899","authorDomain":"wallemalemon"}
- 2 votes
#1 - Wed Nov 12, 2008 6:41 AM EST{"commentId":4028806,"authorDomain":"EEEEEMAN"}
As with any plan there is nothing absolute, however, the original purpose was to allow Iraq to have a self govern rule, will Maliki want absolute control and risk the progress being made, sounds to me like an equipment distribution plan is on the horizon? The US troops are definitely on a withdraw and rightly so?
{"commentId":4028806,"threadId":"416710","contentId":"2102899","authorDomain":"EEEEEMAN"}
- 4 votes
#2 - Wed Nov 12, 2008 7:16 AM EST{"commentId":4028874,"authorDomain":"asergeantsmom"}
Mr. Burns,
Is this report for real? I did not see it posted at NBCNews.com. My son is slated to report in Iraq. Please be certain that the material you are posting is absolute regarding these initiatives.
Thanks.
{"commentId":4028874,"threadId":"416710","contentId":"2102899","authorDomain":"asergeantsmom"}
- 2 votes
#3 - Wed Nov 12, 2008 7:27 AM EST{"commentId":4028885,"authorDomain":"biggerthebetter"}
Good thing this is being done under Bush, or else it would be blamed on Obama's love for terrorists and desire to see them grow bold and come over here next.
/sarcasm
{"commentId":4028885,"threadId":"416710","contentId":"2102899","authorDomain":"biggerthebetter"}
- 2 votes
#4 - Wed Nov 12, 2008 7:27 AM EST{"commentId":4029068,"authorDomain":"wallemalemon"}
...fear of the unknown, now there's a path to acting out on behalf of deluding one's self beyond doubt....sadly, we must leave...oh, it's been such a heart-warming endeavor...hearts and minds all over the world, won to our heroic cause....erasing the fascist Saddam, a traitor..a turncoat... once America's biggest customer of weapons of mass destruction, and once our most loyal agent of proxy....a real tragedy, we could not save him. The people of Iraq have a view of democracy now that accepts by example their need to be corrupt and manipulative, knowing that war is the perfect answer for settling their arguments, and money can buy a lot of weapons to secure their defense. So glad, that we're back in the buisness of selling the weapons we used to give to them...it's the most we can do for them......
{"commentId":4029068,"threadId":"416710","contentId":"2102899","authorDomain":"wallemalemon"}
- 2 votes
{"commentId":4028948,"authorDomain":"asergeantsmom"}
Mr. Burns,
I did not read this article at any major news source web site, nor did I hear about it on an major news networks. If you have posted it here at Newsvine.com because of that, and it is concise, I applaud you for making a valiant decision to do so.
{"commentId":4028948,"threadId":"416710","contentId":"2102899","authorDomain":"asergeantsmom"}
- 3 votes
#5 - Wed Nov 12, 2008 7:39 AM EST{"commentId":4029084,"authorDomain":"lunartick"}
I just thought I'd comment to help clarify how Newsvine works.
Newsvine has two sources of articles--the first is a subscription to the Associated Press's wire feed, the second is through user-submitted content that is "seeded" from elsewhere on the web.
This article is from the AP wire feed. You can tell this because it is just the article along with a byline. A seeded article will have the seeders name/userid at the top of the page, along with a "Read Article" link and an "Article Source" line.
The author of this piece, Robert Burns, did not "seed" this article here--it was automatically posted by Newsvine because it came in off the wire feed. He likely isn't even aware that it's posted here, and he won't be reading these comments. However, he does work for one of the biggest news organizations in the world, so you can be relatively sure that the article has merit.
As for not finding it elsewhere on the web, I was able to find a number of other postings of this same wire-feed story with a simple Google search.
Hope this helps clarify some things.
{"commentId":4029084,"threadId":"416710","contentId":"2102899","authorDomain":"lunartick"}
- 5 votes
{"commentId":4057551,"authorDomain":"asergeantsmom"}
LunarTick,
Sometimes people comment rhetorically as is the case with my post to encourage others like it to be seeded or written. As a professional editor/journalist I am more than sufficiently aware of how Newsvine.com and news feeds works. I've written several articles. I suggest you save your sarcasm for some who might see value in your remarks.
Thanks.
Additionally, how do you know that Mr. Burns does not track readership of his articles? I do. Most reporters do. This is how journalists log which substantive issues for articles will attract the most readers.
Good day.
{"commentId":4057551,"threadId":"416710","contentId":"2102899","authorDomain":"asergeantsmom"}
- 1 vote
{"commentId":4059997,"authorDomain":"wallemalemon"}
lunartic, from your comment;
....However, he does work for one of the biggest news organizations in the world, so you can be relatively sure that the article has merit.....
Yeah, he works for one of the biggest news organs in the howll woillld..
does that make for an automatic 'merit' badge???? I don't think so.
{"commentId":4059997,"threadId":"416710","contentId":"2102899","authorDomain":"wallemalemon"}
- 1 vote
{"commentId":4075285,"authorDomain":"asergeantsmom"}
Exactly, lovetrust.
Sometimes "biggest" can dilute "actual and factual" news. Great point.
{"commentId":4075285,"threadId":"416710","contentId":"2102899","authorDomain":"asergeantsmom"}
- 2 votes
{"commentId":4028970,"authorDomain":"acidreflux"}
The logistical resources needed to house and supply a larger and more distributed U.S. force in Afghanistan
Yet the apologists for the Iraq war have told us repeatedly that our efforts there have in no way weakened or inhibited the far more necessary work in Afghanistan. No wonder this is being done quietly: the big lie must be preserved at least until the liar is out of office.
{"commentId":4028970,"threadId":"416710","contentId":"2102899","authorDomain":"acidreflux"}
- 6 votes
#6 - Wed Nov 12, 2008 7:42 AM EST{"commentId":4029282,"authorDomain":"waynef415"}
OK maybe they could answer something for me... If we're going to be pulled out of all major cities by next June, how come the troops won't be coming home until 2012 (according to the Bush Admin.)? Why do we need to hang out in the middle of nowhere for 3 more years?
{"commentId":4029282,"threadId":"416710","contentId":"2102899","authorDomain":"waynef415"}
- 1 vote
#7 - Wed Nov 12, 2008 8:27 AM EST{"commentId":4030457,"authorDomain":"Profchaos"}
They are out of the cities but still close-by in a support capacity, in case the iraqis need help in a situation. We want to make sure the iraqis can stand on thier own and take care of thier own country. We are willing to help them when needed. It would be hard to help them if we were out of the country.
{"commentId":4030457,"threadId":"416710","contentId":"2102899","authorDomain":"Profchaos"}
{"commentId":4043822,"authorDomain":"waynef415"}
Yes but if the troops have camp set up out in the desert, wouldn't that make them huge sitting ducks? Not to mention the fact that it's likely unsustainable, we are running out of money and probably can't afford to station everyone out there on standby for 3 more years, at least not for the same price tag we've been paying. One year, maybe, but not three.
{"commentId":4043822,"threadId":"416710","contentId":"2102899","authorDomain":"waynef415"}
{"commentId":4045172,"authorDomain":"acidreflux"}
wouldn't that make them huge sitting ducks
Less so than in the cities. You can establish free-fire zones around an isolated base and see someone coming long before they get there. The enemy lacks heavy artillery and an air force, remember.
{"commentId":4045172,"threadId":"416710","contentId":"2102899","authorDomain":"acidreflux"}
- 1 vote
{"commentId":4029431,"authorDomain":"jpfoxy"}
I have always said that to find out who benefits from any enterprise, one only needs to look at the money trail. Really. Who has benefited from the war in Iraq except those who made money off of it? I certainly don't feel any safer.
{"commentId":4029431,"threadId":"416710","contentId":"2102899","authorDomain":"jpfoxy"}
- 3 votes
#8 - Wed Nov 12, 2008 8:44 AM EST{"commentId":4030886,"authorDomain":"mikekathycook"}
There were no Al Qaida in Iraq until after the American intervention. However, Al Qaida very quickly realized this was a "must win" battleground for them and they began pouring into Iraq where our forces slowly learned how to fight and kill Al Qaida in difficult urban combat. Americans who don't feel any safer because 7,000 Al Qaida have been killed now have their own leader with his own Big Ideas about how to fight a War on Terror that most Democrats don't even think is worth fighting.
Obviously, we can't fight Wahabi ideology in Saudi Arabia. Nor can we invade Pakistan, despite Obama's careless and insincere rhetoric hinting at that. If you haven't noticed, Pakistan has about 60-100 nuclear weapons under the care of a military establishment that is more secular and Westernized than the general population, similar to the situation in Turkey and Algeria. Pakistan has been quietly allowing American military supplies to be trucked through the Khyber pass from ports in Pakistan to our war front in Afghanistan.
These supplies have been absolutely critical to the anti-Taliban and anti-Al Qaida war effort.
Particularly it is important to get diesel fuel shipped that route, as flying in fuel is extremely expensive, but yesterday even a shipment of Humvees was intercepted and seized by a militant ambush in Pakistan proper. Our prez-elect talks real big about having a better way of winning in Afghanistan, but if he destabilizes Pakistan so that we get no cooperation and even actively are at war with the Pakistani army, navy, and air force, then we will all have hell to pay.
{"commentId":4030886,"threadId":"416710","contentId":"2102899","authorDomain":"mikekathycook"}
#9 - Wed Nov 12, 2008 10:27 AM EST{"commentId":4031016,"authorDomain":"mikekathycook"}
By the way, the poster who described Iraq as "the middle of nowhere" displays fantastic ignorance about the Middle East. Iraq is smack dab in the middle of the Middle East powers, which is precisely why Al Qaid chose to fight the USA there (where our troops beat them after the surge.) If you don't feel safer because the Bush administration for a bright, shining, moment, fought and held a critical center position, then I hope you will have the intellectual honesty to recognize and admit that the disaster which comes now subsequent to throwing away that strategic position is your own inept doing.....
{"commentId":4031016,"threadId":"416710","contentId":"2102899","authorDomain":"mikekathycook"}
- 2 votes
#10 - Wed Nov 12, 2008 10:34 AM EST{"commentId":4036845,"authorDomain":"socialcritic"}
Show me where the money, money, money, money, and more money, went....and you will understand this whole stinking mess......the coming disaster has been in the cards since day one....
Only one person got through the Khyber Pass when it was Englishmen and their encampment trying to get out of Afghanistan......and he was badly hurt but I speculate was allowed to get away to tell the world about the thousands who were murdered under a white flag.....
Westerners are too stupid about the whole middle east to be allowed in that sandbox..... and those who think they are smart about this part of the world have been played for fools by the Saudis, for one group.........
White westerners, get over yourselves.........
{"commentId":4036845,"threadId":"416710","contentId":"2102899","authorDomain":"socialcritic"}
#11 - Wed Nov 12, 2008 3:51 PM EST{"canLink":false,"threadId":"416710","isPrivate":false}
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
Start Tracking
Stop TrackingCOMPANY STUFF:
LEGAL STUFF:
- © 2005-2009 Newsvine, Inc. |
- Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
- Newsvine is a property of
