30,000 Troop Drawdown in Iraq? Don’t Believe the Headfake
30,000 Troop Drawdown in Iraq? Don’t Believe the Headfake
The headline from the Rumsfeld/Rice trip to Baghdad today is that the United States might pull out 30,000 troops this year. There’s actually nothing new in this statement. Since last year, top Bush administration officials and generals in the field have been saying that significant withdrawals of US troops were likely to occur in 2006.
As many have learned the hard way, it is more important to watch what the Bush administration does rather than believe what it says. There are troubling signs that the Bush administration wants to make the U.S. presence permanent in Iraq. According to Newsweek, the Bush administration is putting forward plans to beef up military installations in Iraq:
- The Bush administration is asking for more than $1.1 billion for new military construction in Iraq – roughly double what it plans to spend in Kuwait, Qatar, and the UAE combined.
-
NellisBalad Air Force Base in Northern Iraq is second only to London’s Heathrow airport with 27,500 landings and takeoffs a month;- The $592 million new US Embassy in Baghdad rivals the Vatican City in size (US embassy is 104 acres, about 80 football fields; Vatican City is 109 acres).
The main problem is these steps only feed perceptions of occupation that fuel terrorist attacks and give America’s terrorist enemies the perfect recruitment tool -– without helping advance U.S. interests in the Gulf region.
The United States need to take back control of its national security and send a clear message to Iraqi leaders that they need to strike the power-sharing deals to stabilize the country –- as proposed in American Progress’s strategic redeployment plan.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
65 Responses to “30,000 Troop Drawdown in Iraq? Don’t Believe the Headfake”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
There’s no way this drawdown number can be beleived. They’ve got too much money going in. Think about a bellshaped curve: They’re on the left hand side, going up. This is not a drawdown, but more of the LBJ-nonsense.
They want us to believe fiction. The numbers do not add up. It looks like the White House doesn’t want the Congress to realize — more of the programs are going to be cut, and the debts will have to increase. This doesn’t include the illegal war in Iran.
April 26th, 2006 at 12:54 pmExpect an increase of 30,000 troops some time this summer followed by a 30,000 troop drawdown this fall.
April 26th, 2006 at 1:04 pmWatch these commercials being aired by MoveOn…
Red Handed
April 26th, 2006 at 1:05 pmI’m pretty sure we still have troops in Germany. The new Iraqi government, an ally of the U.S. will surely want a U.S. presence.
April 26th, 2006 at 1:06 pmI’m pretty sure we still have troops in Germany. The new Iraqi government, an ally of the U.S. will surely want a U.S. presence.
Comment by C Storms
Ya I know. What was George Washington thinking killing all those Brits??? We should have wanted their presence. And that fake loyalist government they had over here was a real ally of the Brits… we had such a good thing going…
April 26th, 2006 at 1:12 pmAs for the “We still have troops in Germany” arguement. You guys really don’t remember shit do you. It was announced in August of 2004 that American troop would be leaving Germany.
You guys should all have your memories checked, because you can’t seem to remember or retain anything.
13WHAM.com Rochester, NY
April 26th, 2006 at 1:16 pmAugust 16, 2004
President Bush plans to restructure 70,000 troops
http://www.13wham.com/ news/ national/ story.aspx?content_id=F0F606B7-6DA2-4483-8009-5730121AAAA4
They will be replaced by a brigade - a much smaller unit
So what you’re saying is that we still have troops in Germany.
April 26th, 2006 at 1:20 pmOh, and talking about troops in Germany. There will be troops in Iraq 60 years after the “end of the war”, as in Germany?
April 26th, 2006 at 1:20 pm“…and send a clear message to Iraqi leaders that they need to strike the power-sharing deals to stabilize the country…”
Well, with Rummy, Condi, assorted generals and Khalilizad sticking their noses into the process, the notion that al-Maliki, or al-Jaafari before him, can act in a “sovereign” manner and “in the best interests of the Iraqi people” is a bit of a bad joke, is it not? Not only did the US Embassy practically write the last version of the Iraq Constitution, but Iraq is still living under the horrific “TAL”, Paulie Walnuts and the CPAs’ legacy to Iraq instability. The “clear message” has been and remains today that the US is in charge, it’s their show and their government, their “enduring bases”, and that the Iraqis have little or no manoeuvering room under such conditions of occupation and client-state relations.
April 26th, 2006 at 1:21 pmThink Progress is wise to note that the presence of military installations in Iraq will “only feed perceptions of occupation” in that country. This is why Murtha’s plan is so disengenuous, when he calls for U.S. troops to redeploy “over the horizon”. If the troops are stationed over or under, above or beyond the horizon, Iraqis will realize that U.S. troops can be redeployed back into their country at a moment’s notice, giving the distinct impression that the United States in interested in permanently occupying their country. The best course of action is to advocate, not a withdrawal as Kerry has said, which would not take effect until the end of the year, by which time close to 3000 Americans can wind up very dead and thousands more maimed and crippled, but rather, as retired General William Odom has recommended, rapid and immediate withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq.
April 26th, 2006 at 1:25 pmYes. But, it won’t be considered a military presence. I was in the Army. a brigade is nothing.
Brigade:
An army unit commanded by a brigadier-general and comprising approximately 4,000 men divided into four battalions and including engineers, signals, medical, mortar and machine gun units.
4k troops is a lot smaller than 70k.
4k troops is not considered a presence.
Shit, you could have all of them in a “base” the size of a high school. The company I work for has around 3,500 employees and that is in a building that occupies less than a city block.
April 26th, 2006 at 1:25 pmBush will never leave Iraq untill most of the OIL has been extracted out of the ground > that could take 10 to 20 years or more!
April 26th, 2006 at 1:26 pmDo the troops believe this shit anymore?
If so, I feel sorry for them.
April 26th, 2006 at 1:33 pmWell, of course there will be a draw down. Gotta have some troops to send to Iran.
April 26th, 2006 at 1:35 pmI am done with President Bush~~
~~In the year 2001 before 9-11 ~~ he deeply embarrassed me personally by profusely apologizing to the Chinese ~~ it was REALLY EMBARRASSING to see the two week ~~ rewriting of an apology to the damn Chinese ~~ but after 9-11 I realized President Bush had a good idea to go into Afghanistan with worldwide support ~~ continue our Iraq Policy ~~albeit without world support ~~ but since mid-2004 ~~I started to notice odd quirks and pathetic missteps ~~ Then right now I have serious problems ~~ our foreign policy mirrors that of Israel exactly ~~ North Korea is appeased (maybe because they are not threatening Israel) ~~ so all in all the below poll will give you an idea of what I think of President Bush at this moment:
Judging from his stances and actions, President Bush is actually: (pick 1)
April 26th, 2006 at 1:36 pmPresident of Israel
President of Iraq
President of Mexico
President of Saudi Arabia, UAE and Kuwait
President of Spending
Vice President of the USA
MXXLENT,
I’m gonna go with the one you didn’t list.
President of the New World Order
April 26th, 2006 at 1:51 pmThis is all part of a desperate “Look over there” strategy by the Bush spin team.
His chief Svengali and Policy Guru Karl Rove is testi-lying again. This has also “dissappeared the ‘Revolt of the Generals” too.
In the past few days we have seen:
*Democratic analyst at CIA is a spy story–that seems a bit shaky at best.
*Bin Laden releases a tape
*Al Zarqawi releases a tape
*Condi and Rummy go to Baghdad on a “surprise” visit.
*Bush dodges to the left on the oil industry and the immigration issue
*Drawdown of troops announced
These are the acts of a criminal syndicate in their last throes.
-GSD
April 26th, 2006 at 2:01 pmMan you guys really got to reach that far back in history to compare troops in Germany to troops in Iraq. Silly. So tell me how many American troops were killed after VE-Day? How long did the civil war last in Germany after the war? How many cities did we bomb after major combat operations ceased in Germany? How many civilians were killed after major combat operations ceased in Germany?
Pathetic argument.
April 26th, 2006 at 2:18 pmGSD,
You forgot:
*Bush is going to get tough on Big Oil
April 26th, 2006 at 2:19 pmdlet - I agree. I would say the real question is….how many troops do we have in Vietnam?
April 26th, 2006 at 2:20 pmSpudge_Boy follow my link and look at comments ~~ we discussed the one world notion and new world order ~~
April 26th, 2006 at 2:29 pmTell me about it.
Talk about a pre-9/11 menality.
April 26th, 2006 at 2:30 pm#20 Jules
April 26th, 2006 at 2:35 pmI say we up them. How many troops do we have in Tripoli from the war with the Barbary States….none.
roughly double what it plans to spend in Kuwait, Qatar, and the UAE combined.
Are people actively shooting at us in any of those three? and isn’t Iraq much larger then all of them combined, maybe even 3-4 times as large? Seems to make sense to spend extra on military needs when its a region where the military has needs.
April 26th, 2006 at 2:44 pmAnd really, does it matter how many troops we have where? Is that really a concern regarding what is going on in Iraq? This is just another propaganda ploy by this administration to try to up Bush’s numbers.
Although I do think I might like to go to Tripoli!
April 26th, 2006 at 2:44 pm#25
Your right, it doesn’t matter how many troops are where. Every once and a while I just like to bebunk the junk some of the trolls spew.
Speaking of…
April 26th, 2006 at 2:52 pm#24
I think that Kuwait, Qatar and UAE sort of asked us to build there. While I think it is an unwise thing for us to and I bet there was a fair amount of arm twisting that led to the decision to “ask” us to build bases there, Iraq was invaded by us and now we are building bases to occupy the country. Vastly different situations.
dlet my comment in 25 was not aimed at you. Rather I was trying to understand why our having troops in Germany was sufficient reason for us to remain in a country that we have basically decimated by attacking them unjustly because we had a lieing, cheating, lily livered president who wanted his oil friends to steal their oil.
April 26th, 2006 at 2:56 pmI was trying to understand why our having troops in Germany was sufficient reason for us to remain in a country that we have basically decimated
Not at all unlike post WW2 Germany, and that rebuilding turned out okay.
April 26th, 2006 at 3:04 pmNot at all unlike post WW2 Germany, and that rebuilding turned out okay.
Comment by bhealy — April 26, 2006 @ 3:04 pm
So what is happening in Iraq right now is OK?
April 26th, 2006 at 3:06 pmroughly double what it plans to spend in Kuwait, Qatar, and the UAE combined.
Are people actively shooting at us in any of those three? and isn’t Iraq much larger then all of them combined, maybe even 3-4 times as large? Seems to make sense to spend extra on military needs when its a region where the military has needs.
Comment by squegeeboo
Considering we are AMERICANS and not IRAQIS and considering IRAQIS did not attack America on 911 and the people who did are being protected by the Bush clan, then we should not be there at all…let alone building our own “settlements” or “bases” in their country…. but then again we openly commited a holocaust against the natives in our own country so I guess we have no problem doing it to people in their own home land…
April 26th, 2006 at 3:11 pmWe’ve made a commitment and should continue aid until it is no longer needed (of course who will decide that).
April 26th, 2006 at 3:12 pmTime to bring all the troops home from Iraq and cut all the funds to the Pentagon! The Oil Cartels can use all their swindled profits to hire a mercenary army of thugs to try to hold onto the Oil fields! Demand that the Congress ends this fiasco immediately!
April 26th, 2006 at 3:42 pmReduce troops by year’s end. Maybe by November.
Bet on October. Elections in November.
Bastards.
April 26th, 2006 at 4:57 pmBush should stop poking sticks in the face of a snake. Anyone from Texas can tell ya, it’s not a good idea! If he’s so sure that Iran system of government is a system bound for failure, then leave them alone and let them get about the business of failing. All he’s doing is providing a reason for the Iranians to rally round the flag!
April 26th, 2006 at 5:39 pmAs many have learned the hard way, it is more important to watch what the Bush administration does rather than believe what it says.
You progs still don’t get it, do you? We are at WAR in Iraq. Our policy there has to be determined by the facts on the ground, not by a bunch of Left-wing pinheads sipping lattes in their easy chairs. It is more important to watch aht the Iraqi government does, what the Iraqi military does, and, above all, what our terroist enemies do, How come you progs never can get that through your thick (numb) skulls?
April 26th, 2006 at 5:44 pmbush isnt going to stop poking sticks in snakes faces until he gets bit ( impeached which unfortuanatly will probalby never happen)
April 26th, 2006 at 5:52 pm# 35 We are at WAR in Iraq we are at war with Iraq but we never should of been we did it for Bush&friends oil companies
April 26th, 2006 at 5:57 pmour policy there (Iraq) has to be determined by the facts on the ground, not by a bunch of Left-wing pinheads sipping lattes in their easy chairs.
Comment by Blue State Red — April 26, 2006 @ 5:44 pm
Except the policy is not being determined by forces on the ground but by rightwing pinheads who either have never served in the military, or never saw combat if they did, sipping coffee, and shouting Yeehaw.
April 26th, 2006 at 6:06 pmWe are at WAR in Iraq.
Comment by Blue State Red — April 26, 2006 @ 5:44 pm
Yo Sh*t for brains we were not at war with Iraq BEFORE we invaded, just likeIraq was not at war with Kuwait before saddam invaded………but drool on like a foole
April 26th, 2006 at 6:36 pmI hate to say it, but…
A terrorist attack is probably just what the Bush administration wants.
April 26th, 2006 at 7:00 pmwe are at war with Iraq but we never should of been we did it for Bush&friends oil companies
I especially love this old fever swamp chestnut. So, if we did it for oil, how come gasoline prices have risen, while supplies have dropped? “Doing it for oil” would only increase supplies, and put downward pressure on gasoline prices. Or are “Bush&friends” - along with you - so dumb they don’t understand simple economics?
April 26th, 2006 at 7:52 pmBSR with the tighting of supplies world wide the fight in Uraq was because of the fact that Saddam was selling oil for euros not dollars….and given the FACT that one of Bremer’s first actions as CPA was to tear up the oil contracts that Saddam had with other countries and rewrite the contracts for dollars, along with the FACT that the ministry of OIL was protected by the US military as hospitals schools and munition dumps were left unguarded (hospitals in violation of the geneva convention) leaves little to be debated that the Administration had oil on the brain when they charged into IRAQ.
April 26th, 2006 at 8:02 pm30,000 Troop DrawUP in IraN? Believe!
April 26th, 2006 at 8:06 pmGas From Iran will go to the Ukraine.
Thats the Deal the Ambassadors will make, or have planned to make. aka “War Booty”
SSISTANT SECRETARY FLORY: I’d just like to add a couple of words from the perspective of the U.S. Department of Defense, one of which is to reiterate, as Assistant Secretary Fried said earlier, the strong support of the United States Government for a strong, free, democratic, and sovereign Ukraine, one that is able to chart its own course on the world stage. We also took the opportunity in our meetings to express our appreciation to Ukraine for the many contributions that Ukraine has made and continues to make to international security in Iraq, in the Balkans, and in a number of areas. Lastly to discuss with our colleagues here and to commend our colleagues, particularly Minister Hrytsenko, on the tremendous progress Ukraine again has made and continues to make in defense reform; that is in modernizing the armed services of Ukraine and the defense organizations of Ukraine to make them more effective and modern and more capable in operating in a modern world as part of Ukraine’s own security and also as a contribution to international security.
[The Balkans? Dint know that one]
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FRIED: As a final word I would like to express thanks to the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry and to Minister Tarasyuk for making this room available to us, and now we are happy to take questions.
QUESTION: Mr. Wayne, what do you think about the prospects for the rescinding of the Jackson-Vanik amendment?
[[According to the 1974 Trade act, the Jackson-Vanik amendment, named for its major co-sponsors, Sen. Henry “Scoop” Jackson (D-WA) and Rep. Charles Vanik (D-OH), denied Normal Trade Relations to certain countries with non-market economies that restricted emigration rights. Permanent normal trade relations would be extended to a country subject to the law only if the President determined that it complies with the freedom of emigration requirements of the amendment. However, the President had the authority to grant a yearly waiver to the provisions of Jackson-Vanik, and these waivers were granted to the People’s Republic of China starting in the late 1970s and later to Vietnam.]]
ASSISTANT SECRETARY WAYNE: Well the administration of the United States fully supports lifting the restrictions on Jackson-Vanik as they apply to Ukraine. The Senate of the United States in November passed unanimously legislation to repeal Jackson-Vanik as it applies to Ukraine. The House of Representatives still needs to take action. There are several pieces of legislation in the House of Representatives that would lift Jackson-Vanik and we are working with members of the House of Representatives and we will encourage them to take action on this. So we are very hopeful and we will continue to work hard toward this end.
QUESTION: Mr. Flory, you mentioned that Ukraine is a sovereign country that can chart its own course and in the context of the recent gas crisis Ukraine would be interested in developing energy cooperation and energy transit corridors with Iran. In the context of international security issues, do you think that this kind of cooperation is feasible and that something may happen in this area within the next ten or twenty years?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FLORY: I am going to make one comment and then ask my colleagues who handle this kind of energy security question.But I’m not sure if Ukraine is looking for reliable and consistent sources of energy that Iran is necessarily the one that I would choose, but I again ask my colleagues to step in on that.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FRIED: Well I think that’s right. If I were looking for reliable, commercially based, long-term supplies of natural gas, I might not look first to Iran. There are other gas suppliers in the neighborhood. But to be clear Russia is, and will likely always be, a major gas supplier to Ukraine. The problem is the apparent use of political pressure on Ukraine and the way the deal came together with a very shady intermediary firm, RusUkrEnergo, a firm no one really understands or at least no one in the United States or Europe and few in Ukraine seem to understand, playing a role. The problem is not Russian gas, per say, the problem is the lack of transparency in the arrangements.
Of course those who KNOW “Scoop” Jackson, Perle and Wolfowitz go back all the Way to Amoral Trotskyite Likuds.
Scoops papers are /were Reclassified by CIA.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/2/15/201851/101
I really Gotta laugh at BSR, sorry dude, but do you do any looking before leaping?
April 26th, 2006 at 8:22 pmPNAC. What informed American hasn’t heard of the treacherous Project for a New American Century by now?
PNAC is a small off-shoot, occupying the 5th floor, of the American Enterprise Institute which has been around since 1943. The AEI has 12 very busy floors where its operative have had plenty of time to send their operatives over to infiltrate the Democratic Party, or leave them in to be more accurate since the PNACers & AEIers are ORIGINALLY DEMOCRATS. To this day Richard Perle, Fieth and Wolfowitz are still Democrats. The day the Republican party, which they hijacked also, no longer suits their needs, they’ll follow other PNAC neo-cons like Marshall Wittman back to the Democratic Party where the neoliberal Democratic Leadership Council is laying out the welcome mat for them.
The AEI, the PNAC & the DLC were founded by Scoop Jackson democrats who follow the philosophy of Leo Strauss. To this day the DLC is stacked with neo-conservative ideologues, who maintain deep personal ties to the war-mongers in the Bush Administration.
April 26th, 2006 at 8:30 pmWolfowitz is of course a ‘Scoop Jackson’ Democrat But what is Scoop? =)
Because the Iragqi insurgents, who want their country back, keep blowing up the oil pipelines, ruining Bush’s plan.
Get with the program.
April 26th, 2006 at 8:49 pmPost 41 lol > gasoline prices rise when Oil production is curtailed > Oil shipments out of Iraq were almost up to 3 million barrels a day before Bush took over Iraq, now down to less than 1 million barrels a day! The invasion of Iraq was never to give Americans cheaper fuel, but to control the outflow of Oil from Iraq to raise gasoline prices! Oil Cartels want more profits!!!
April 26th, 2006 at 11:29 pmThe spiral is continuing. The Cheney Rumsfeld Feith Wolfowitz lies are beginning to catch up with them. Coupled with the Rove power capture, aided by fools like Frist and Delay, the trend is downward, steeply so. Even those who laughed at real accomplishments by the soldier Kerry and praised the cowardly acts by a drunken Bush are beginning to proclaim the uselessness of following an “emperor without clothing”.
These evil pseudo-Christians will spend some time suffering, unless they isolate themselves from the Billy and Franklin Graham crusades and publicly demean the Robertson billionaire and Falwell fool. Rumsfeld has more than a hundred million dollars, why does he need more? Robertson can’t even count his wealth and Cheney’s firm earns untold billions for their efforts at government supported failure. Time to arrest the lot of them in the administration, Congress, the Pentagon leadership and all those firms like Halliburton suckling on the teat of the administration’s excesses.
We need a Constitutional Amentment to restrict any relative of the Bushes from doing business or holding office in this country, and to permit removing an entire administration and replacing it with an opposition one, when they contribute to the deaths of so many.
We are seen throughout the world as terrorists, for that is what we are. We lost around 3000 people to a ignominious nonentity like bin Laden, whose family was in business with the Bush family, so our response was to attack and kill more than 100,000 innocents in a country unconnected to the deaths of the 3000. The bullies in the White House were easily able to change story after story to justify their crimes.
The only real solution is for the Hague or perhaps some similar group to hold a trial in absentia of the administration, the British leadership and the Australian leadership and then require the UN to find a means to punish those responsible.
Who would be placed on that list, Iwonder?
April 27th, 2006 at 2:35 pm[…] Congress has now spoken with a clear and unambiguous voice a time when there are troubling signs that the administration wants to make the U.S. presence permanent in Iraq. For example, the administration is currently constructing a $592 million U.S. embassy in Baghdad that spans the size of 80 football fields. […]
May 4th, 2006 at 12:15 pm[…] The talk of a 30,000 troop drawdown really was a headfake. Yesterday, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld “said he cannot guarantee that there will be substantial withdrawals of U.S. troops from Iraq this year.†While Rumsfeld hopes for a drawdown, he “can’t promise it.†[…]
May 18th, 2006 at 9:09 amI enjoyed your page. Keep up the good work! Feel free to visit my page. It\’s cool too.
July 28th, 2006 at 3:53 amHello people! Nice site!
July 29th, 2006 at 1:41 pmPretty nice site, wants to see much more on it! :)
August 22nd, 2006 at 8:01 pmHello people! Nice site!l
August 25th, 2006 at 7:43 amvalium
September 22nd, 2006 at 10:04 pmI\’m love this great website. Many thanks guye
September 29th, 2006 at 10:00 amExcellent web site I will be visiting often+
September 29th, 2006 at 12:30 pmWow!!! Good job. Could I take some of yours triks to build my own site?
October 8th, 2006 at 1:31 amInteresting web page is, i\’ll see you later one more time+
October 19th, 2006 at 8:38 amI have been looking for sites like this for a long time. Thank you!+
October 24th, 2006 at 3:34 pmYou have built a good websitei
October 26th, 2006 at 10:43 amHi, good morning to all of you… Nice Guestbook ;-) !!!n
December 8th, 2006 at 4:25 amcpa firms
I found your post comments while searching Google. Very relevant especially as this is not an issue which a lot of peaople are conversant with.
March 17th, 2008 at 5:18 pmCar Loans
Auto loan are found to be productive comfortable settlement to searching for an admirable auto loan responsibility on the internet.
March 21st, 2008 at 5:28 pmclear debts
Many blogs have stopped using trackbacks because dealing with spam became too burdensome.) Some individuals or companies have abused
April 11th, 2008 at 6:03 am