« CSI: How the Immigration Bill was Killed | Main | Preacher Tells of CIA Torture in Egypt »

End Game Approaching for Iraq

It does appear that we are seeing the beginning of the end game for our involvement in Iraq according to the Washington Post:

U.S. military officials here are increasingly envisioning a "post-occupation" troop presence in Iraq that neither maintains current levels nor leads to a complete pullout, but aims for a smaller, longer-term force that would remain in the country for years.

This goal, drawn from recent interviews with more than 20 U.S. military officers and other officials here, including senior commanders, strategists and analysts, remains in the early planning stages. It is based on officials' assessment that a sharp drawdown of troops is likely to begin by the middle of next year, with roughly two-thirds of the current force of 150,000 moving out by late 2008 or early 2009. The questions officials are grappling with are not whether the U.S. presence will be cut, but how quickly, to what level and to what purpose.

It does appear that George W Bush is placing the desire to head off another electoral disaster for the Republicans in 2008 above his often-stated goal of fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them over here. We are no longer waiting for the Iraqis to stand up before we stand down:

Officials now dismiss the 2004-06 years -- when Gen. George W. Casey Jr. was in command -- as a fruitless "rush to transition," as one senior defense official here put it. "The idea was, 'As they stand up, we'll stand down,' " he said. That phrase has been all but banished from the Green Zone, as has the notion of measuring U.S. progress in Iraq by the number of Iraqi troops trained or by changes in U.S. casualty counts.

And, as I have written before, so-called "turning points" like the Iraqi elections of 2005 have only accelerated the country's slide into civil war. These events were used simply as propaganda by the administration to shore up faltering support for the war.

Top military officials even say that Iraq's elections in December 2005 only deepened sectarian divides and contributed to the outbreak of a low-grade civil war in Baghdad last year. "We wanted an election in the worst way, and we got one in the worst way," one U.S. general here said.

The important objective right now is to get the ball rolling in the direction of withdrawal. Complete withdrawal won't happen overnight and it probably shouldn't. It's clear that George W Bush wants to maintain a presence of probably 50,000 troops in Iraq right up to the time he leaves office in January of 2009. That's too large a force in my estimation but it's a clear reversal of Bush's ill-advised escalation that began early this year. With the Republicans banished from the Presidency in 2009 and a strengthened Democratic majority in Congress we will be able to build momentum towards an even further reduction of our forces in Iraq.

Note: Wizbang Blue is now closed and our authors have moved on. Paul Hooson can now be found at Wizbang Pop!. Please come see him there!

  • Currently 3.4/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rating: 3.4/5 (5 votes cast)

Comments (2)

Paul Hamilton:

From what I'm reading, it won't be an endgame at all, it will just be a transition to what we have in Korea, only with a lot of danger involved. We'll maintain a force of 50,000 or so to maintain Xanadu, which is what I call our embassy, and to prop up the puppet government.

I don't think this is a tenable situation, but we should be able to maintain a bunkered status quo for Baghdad while probably the rest of the nation will start to achieve some sort of political equilibrium with the Kurds, Sunni and Shia each laying claim to some parts of the country.

Steve Crickmore:

The US military could be envisioning a long term presence in Iraq and the Maliki government is probably wishing for it, but don't count on the members of the Iraqi Parliament, or the Iraqi people; the last big opinion poll in September 2006 recorded that that 91% of Iraqs feel the Americans should withdraw all their troops within 2 years max., (only 9% support an open-ended commitment ) and even more pessimistically support for attacks against U.S.-led forces was 61 percent(27% strongly, 34% somewhat)
With this kind of heavy resentment, it is not possible that there won't be close to zero casualties in any residual 50,000 American task force left, as John McCain believes, or does the Pentagon want to push the 61% figure close to 100%, with the announcement of their permanent bases plan.


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]





Add to Technorati Favorites


Publisher: Kevin Aylward

Editors: Lee Ward, Larkin, Paul S Hooson, and Steve Crickmore

All original content copyright © 2007 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark. Wizbang Blue™ is a trademark of Wizbang®, LLC.

Powered by Movable Type 3.35

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.