Blair to announce U.K. troop withdrawal from Iraq.
By on Feb 20th, 2007 at 5:19 pm
Blair to announce U.K. troop withdrawal from Iraq.
BBC reports: “Tony Blair is expected to announce a timetable for the withdrawal of UK troops from Iraq. The prime minister is due to make an announcement in the House of Commons on Wednesday in which he is expected clarify the details. Mr Blair is expected to say hundreds of troops will return from Basra within weeks with more to follow later. Some 7,000 UK troops are currently serving in Iraq and about 1,500 are expected to return within weeks.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Hip hip hurra! This smart idiot has finally understood how absurd the Iraq war is and is going to leave the dictator all alone.
This piece of news makes my day.
February 20th, 2007 at 5:25 pmWait….I thought time-tables encouraged the terrorists? I thought it aided the insurgency by “telling ‘em when we’re leaving”???
So why is Blair helping AQ? Cant WAIT for the WH spin on this one.
February 20th, 2007 at 5:25 pmWhy does Blair cut and run?
February 20th, 2007 at 5:28 pmWhy does Blair not support his troops?
Yo Blair !! What are you do’in !! Damn !!
February 20th, 2007 at 5:32 pmBush is going to have to smack the naughty poodle.
February 20th, 2007 at 5:33 pmBlair is the emboldener. This will undoubtably embolden the turrurists and hurt Amurican democracy! The decider must decide something about this and quick! God save the queen..and the decider.
February 20th, 2007 at 5:34 pmgood timing…
February 20th, 2007 at 5:40 pmit would be quite a security issue if prince harry had to actually go there… coincidence? … but, regardless,
good on him – he says he would have to go, if his unit went…
Here Fido, here little puppy!
February 20th, 2007 at 5:40 pmBring the slippers!
Arf! Arf! Arf!
Tony’s on his way out, a lame crumpet if you will. He just wants to get them home before he gets turned out to polish his legacy.
Does anyone have any research as to what other countries have troops deployed in theater, and how many?
February 20th, 2007 at 5:48 pmDon’t worry, there will be “clarification” of what Tony said.
February 20th, 2007 at 5:55 pmBlair doesn’t want 7,000 UK troops stuck in southern Iraq when Bush launches his pre-emptive war in Iran.
He knows they’ll be sitting ducks.
Chimpy on the other hand believes the magical cloud being will prevent Americans from dying. He told phony Rev. Pat Robertson just that.
-GSD
February 20th, 2007 at 5:56 pmGood on ya Tony…!!!
February 20th, 2007 at 5:58 pmWe still have Poland.
/snark
February 20th, 2007 at 5:59 pmBlair still clings to his crumb of cheese as he rat-paddles away from the sinking luxury liner.
February 20th, 2007 at 6:01 pmthat ought to take care of another fraction of the 28%ers…..
wonder where dubbie’s #’s will be in another couple weeks?
impeachably low, is my bet.
February 20th, 2007 at 6:06 pmCall me a conspiracy theorist, but I still have to wonder if he is pulling them out, just to send in a giant wave when the Iran attack is launched??
February 20th, 2007 at 6:08 pm“Up and down the London Road,
February 20th, 2007 at 6:19 pmIn and out of No. 10 Downing,
THAT’S THE WAY Tony Blair GOES!
POP! GOES THE CHIMPya!”
…and I wonder who’ll be taking up the slack ?
February 20th, 2007 at 6:34 pmBlair is telling Bush “enough is enough”British troops will not work alongside American troops that ignore the Geneva conventions and go round murdering and raping 14 year old girls
February 20th, 2007 at 6:36 pmFunny how no one seems to talk about the “coalition” anymore. I guess it’s become too obvious to pretend that one actually exists.
February 20th, 2007 at 6:41 pmBritish troops will not work alongside American troops that ignore the Geneva conventions and go round murdering and raping 14 year old girls
February 20th, 2007 at 6:42 pm#20; I’ll give you 3 gusesses as to who will take up the slack and the first 2 don’t count. The ‘coalition of the willing’ is evaporating faster than a saucer of water in the desert.
February 20th, 2007 at 6:44 pmWMD was a pretext for war , America has used the only WMD in Iraq against the Iraqis – how bloody IRONIC
Deleted uranium shells are classified by the UN as “weapons of mass and indescriminate destruction”
never mind cluster ammo and white phosferous
3 types on WMD used in Iraq by the hypocrites America
February 20th, 2007 at 6:48 pmsorry about that typo, didn’t hit spell check.
February 20th, 2007 at 6:49 pmLib Dems call for Iraq withdrawal
Liberal Democrat leader Sir Menzies Campbell has called for UK troops to leave Iraq by the end of October.
Sir Menzies says a phased withdrawal of British forces should start in May.
But at prime minister’s questions Tony Blair dismissed the call, saying that setting an “arbitrary timetable” would send a “disastrous signal” to Iraq.
MPs are currently debating Iraq in the Commons, with critics of British policy in Iraq expected to force a technical vote to show their unhappiness.
Sir Menzies is the only one of the three main UK party leaders to suggest a withdrawal date.
February 20th, 2007 at 6:52 pmCoalition of the Dwindling?
hahaha
February 20th, 2007 at 7:14 pmCant WAIT for the WH spin on this one.
Comment by Punchy — February 20, 2007 @ 5:25 pm
Saw the report on this on CBS Evening News. Word from the WH is that the administration was expecting this. If they are pissed then they aren’t showing it…at least not yet.
February 20th, 2007 at 7:15 pm“OOPS! Sorry George! Didn’t mean to leave you hanging!”
February 20th, 2007 at 7:28 pmHmm Tony Blair announcing a timetable, more liberal crap emboldening the terrorists.
February 20th, 2007 at 7:29 pmHe’s screwing before the US makes him and his goverment (the UK) look to be the laughing stock of the world. ..the complacent accomplice. Tony is not the fool that george is, only close. He’ll look intelligent after george throws the switch.
February 20th, 2007 at 7:36 pmBush’s poodle is leaving so are the UK troops. Now the UK soldiers will be safe and alive as US soldiers are dying in the civil war in Iraq. As for all those who believe Bush is right and say Support our Troops well at lease we now know what that means. As Walter Reed is letting our troops take care of themselves and no weapons or protection is given to those in the field yet no one gives a damn. The GOP is stalling these as soldiers die everyday so Bush can get the 2.9 trillion dollars for war profiteers and his puppet Iraq govenment. Oh yes and money for Iraq to be rebuilt and give all the Iraq people jobs and hospitals. Maybe our soldiers can be treated at the new Bush Iraq hospitals since Walter Reed sends them to live with mice and roaches.
February 20th, 2007 at 7:45 pmWMD is a fiction of a description. Drop a 500 lbs. conventional bomb down your chimney or 500 lbs of Sarin gas, I will GLADLY take the later as I can outrun and survive the later. Anyone who has EVER had CBN training in the military, if they are honest, will have to admit this. The Sarin attack in the Tokyo subway back in the 90s proved just how ineffectual these fake “WMDs” are. Over 7000 people exposed and only 4 died. If that had been a conventional explosive like Madrid, hundreds upon hundreds would have been killed. Wake up people.
The only real “WMD” is a nuclear weapon, and we knew long before we invaded that Iraq didn’t have them. Iraq does not even have the electrical gird capacity to actually run the cyclotrons to process uranium into weapons grade isotopes.
But please people. “WMDs” is a fictional nothing of a term. Every farmer has more lethal stuff in the form of plain old stick of dynamite than these fraudulent “WMDs”, so I ask, why are we even entertaining the term as a legitimate description of anything real?
February 20th, 2007 at 7:53 pmNot surprising with the recent news of prince Harry wanting to go to Iraq (as soon as March). I feel both public pressure and pressure from the royals tipped Blair’s hand on this.
Let’s not forget about 5 weeks ago Blair said it would be “deeply irresponsible” to set a deadline for pulling British forces out of Iraq
I highly suspect the royal family tipped the scales on this issue. Watch for news that Harry will not be heading to Iraq, but Afghanistan (a comparatively much safer theater).
February 20th, 2007 at 7:56 pmThe British troops are pulling out of Basra. One of two things will happen in that region:
1. Iraqi’s finally learn to fend for themselves, which will mean we have hope for the rest of the country.
2. The radical Shiites move in to fill the power vacuum.
If #1 happens, then one could argue that deposing Hussein was a good idea, and the Iraqi’s CAN govern themselves.
If #2 happens, it’ll be a microcosm of what will happen to the rest of the country if we pull out.
February 20th, 2007 at 7:58 pmIran may be attacked soon. Iran more or less controlls the Basra Shiites. I wouldn’t want to be there either when the shit hits the fan with a handfull of troops.
February 20th, 2007 at 8:06 pmAnd consider this: with 7,000 British troops pulling out, our soldiers and Marines will be in even more danger.
And you people are happy about this?
Tell me again how much you support the troops.
February 20th, 2007 at 8:13 pmWTF, little Repug spin again?
February 20th, 2007 at 8:22 pmIf #1 happens, it means the troops should pull out immediately, Iraqi CAN govern themselves.
If #2 happens, it means that deposing Hussein is nothing expect replace a dictator by radical terrorists. Is it made America safer? And 3000 and more Americans died for nothing. thousands Iraqis killed for nothing.
As usual, Bush is completely out of step with the rest of the world. While other countries are withdrawing their troops, Bush is “surging” ours. Why does Bush hate the troops?
February 20th, 2007 at 8:26 pmThe UK is doing a surge-in-reverse. Go, Tony!
February 20th, 2007 at 8:26 pmre#35 lestatdelc
I like you think it is silly and refuse to use that meaningless term.
The neo-cons had to invent that term to make nuclear weapons which Iraq did not have, the “same” as the chemical and biological weapons that they did have.
Notice how they also “forgot” to mention that chemical and biological weapons have limited shelf lives, and were no longer weapons by the year 2001 given their 5 to 7 year life spans!
February 20th, 2007 at 8:29 pmIf #1 happens, then one could argue that deposing Hussein was a good idea, and the Iraqi’s CAN govern themselves. Comment by Dale — February 20, 2007 @ 7:58 pm
If #1 happens, then it will prove you CONs were wrong about staying in Iraq is preventing violence.
If #2 happens, it’ll be a microcosm of what will happen to the rest of the country if we pull out. Comment by Dale — February 20, 2007 @ 7:58 pm
If #2 happens, it’ll prove you CONs were stupid for ever invading.
You clowns have created a no win situation for your political party, but far worse is the problem you’ve created for the US. You’re the keystone cops of foreign policy.
February 20th, 2007 at 8:45 pmComment by Dale #39
DAMN!
…just when I was about to pop open a bottle of bubbly…
…to celebrate the dearth of TROLLS…
…Dale I hope you realize that…
…not only have you ruined my celebration…
…you really are (numerically AND ideologically speaking)…
…”ONE” dumb right wing inbred sombich…
February 20th, 2007 at 8:48 pmHi Dale cut your absurd pathetic discourse and listen to the wise voice of the brits, u arrogant sob.
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?threadID=5584&&&edition=2&ttl=20070221020018
February 20th, 2007 at 8:53 pmI sincerely hope that Senator Obama uses the CA fundraiser platform tonight to…
…invite Aussie al Crackkker PM Howard to put his TROOPS where his Bushballi*kin’ mouth is…
February 20th, 2007 at 8:59 pm#42, just look at #1, #3, #9, oh hell, most of the posts. You’re wetting yourself, you’re so happy.
February 20th, 2007 at 9:01 pmYes, let Australia put up for Howards big mouth, or shut it up.
The writing is on the wall and all of the hypocritical neocon cowards are still NOT lining up to take their turn, are they Dale??
February 20th, 2007 at 9:13 pm#42, just look at #1, #3, #9, oh hell, most of the posts. You’re wetting yourself, you’re so happy. Comment by Dale — February 20, 2007 @ 9:01 pm
Really, because from where we sit, you’re the only one that seems happy, or like you’re wetting yourself. Maybe your incontinence isn’t just limited to your political opinions, skippy!
February 20th, 2007 at 9:18 pmYou’re wetting yourself, you’re so happy.
Comment by Dale — February 20, 2007 @ 9:01 pm
Whereas you wet yourself when your scared.
February 20th, 2007 at 9:19 pm#42, just look at #1, #3, #9, oh hell, most of the posts. You’re wetting yourself, you’re so happy.
Comment by Dale — February 20, 2007 @ 9:01 pm
There is nothing “happy” about those posts, idiot. It’s called sarcasm. Some of those troops could be repositioned to help the Americans, but no. They are setting a timetable, something Bush said could never be done. Word is that the Iraqi security forces are taking more responsiblity in the areas patrolled by the British. What if the insurgents are just lying low, as Bush said they would if there was ever any mention of withdrawal? TP has 2 postings, below, about the British talking about withdrawal:
Oct. 25, 2006:
Meanwhile, the “British military wants to withdraw troops from Iraq within a year, and London wants to focus on the war in Afghanistan,†a Pentagon official told the New York Times.
Oct. 12, 2006:
The head of the Army is calling for British troops to withdraw from Iraq “soon†or risk catastophic consequences for both Iraq and British society.
In a devastating broadside at Tony Blair’s foreign policy, General Sir Richard Dannatt stated explicitly that the continuing presence of British troops “exacerbates the security problems†in Iraq.
February 20th, 2007 at 9:25 pmIf the insurgents had any brains and organization, they would stop fighting until the “Coalition” left. Then take over. I bet they are going to do that, bastards.
February 20th, 2007 at 9:50 pm55.
Actually, this is the strategy that the Shia militia are likely to take. That way, the coalition will reduce any Sunni militia power to negligible before the pullout.
The same strategy was used by the Sunni’s when Britain last left the region. That is one reason that a minority ruled here for so long.
February 20th, 2007 at 10:03 pmIf the insurgents had any brains and organization, they would stop fighting until the “Coalition†left.
Comment by ForTruth
History was on THEIR (insurgent’s) side from the start…
…the expense in blood and treasure to occupy foreign lands…
…has ALWAYS been prohibitive…
just ask:
Britain
France
Spain
Japan
Germany
…to name a few…
February 20th, 2007 at 10:05 pmThis isn’t happy?
Wow, is this you in your ‘pacifist’ mode Spudge?
February 20th, 2007 at 10:33 pmSpudge, it’s late… take your medicine and go to bed.
February 20th, 2007 at 10:35 pmDale,
Frankly, I think you had that coming.
Just sayin’
February 20th, 2007 at 11:16 pmWow, is this you in your ‘pacifist’ mode Spudge?
Comment by Dale — February 20, 2007 @ 10:33 pm
Wow, is that you in sarcastic mode? You’re so rude and hateful, it’s hard to tell.
February 21st, 2007 at 12:02 amWow, is this you in your ‘pacifist’ mode Spudge?
Comment by Dale — February 20, 2007 @ 10:33 pm
Wow, is that you in sarcastic mode? You’re so rude and hateful, it’s hard to tell.
February 21st, 2007 at 12:03 amBlair sees the writing on the wall in Iraq, but Bush is too stupid to notice!
February 21st, 2007 at 12:13 am[...] 21st, 2007 Via ThinkProgresss ser jag att Storbritannien, eventuellt, planerar att minska sin truppnärvaro i Irak. Det vore [...]
February 21st, 2007 at 4:08 amA “Coalition of the Willing” of one keeps being a “Coalition”?
February 21st, 2007 at 6:55 amWhat will John Howard,Prime Minister of Australia will say to this?!!
Ten days ago he attacked Obama for suggesting withdrawing US
troops,he went further to link him to Bin Ladin…
What will he say about his friend in England Tony Blair?!!
Can Republicans & Fox Network now accuse Tony Blair of ‘Cut & Run’?,
Can they accuse him for ‘helping the Terrorists’?
Can they accuse him of ‘embolding the enemy’?
February 21st, 2007 at 7:12 amJUST ANNOUNCED DANISH TROOPS ALSO TO LEAVE IRAQ …….
February 21st, 2007 at 8:13 amDenmark has announced that it will pull all of its troops out of Iraq in August, as Britain unveiled a plan to scale down its forces in the country.
February 21st, 2007 at 8:14 amThe question I have not heard one single reporter ask: Is America sending more troops to get the job done, or did they know of the latest withdrawls ahead of time and planned to send more troops to fill the gaps? Isn’t this placing an increasing burden on US troops?
AND:
How is sending more troops going to improve the situation in Iraq when the total number of troops isn’t increasing as much as we thought as other allies are leaving.
February 21st, 2007 at 8:57 am#68
February 21st, 2007 at 9:09 amJohn Howard:Niggers and mulatos without whiteness certificate enbolden and encourage our ilslamofascist enemies.They told me so.
open season on American Troops – bring it on insurgents
February 21st, 2007 at 10:00 am3 months ago , the iraqi study group recommended withdrawing troops in 6 months ………. 3 months to go so start getting out now arseholes
February 21st, 2007 at 10:04 amNobody against this war, and against it from the beginning, is happy about anything that has happened in this war. Saddam Hussein being deposed could be some sort of consolation, but the price paid by US troops and Iraqi civilians has gone far beyond any benefit that could come from that. So when you hear (or read) people saying “I told you so” over and over and over and over again, that’s not happiness. It’s part of your education, Dale.
February 21st, 2007 at 10:36 amRead Webster Tarpley’s take on this. He predicts that as the Brits move out, that will leave the southern flank exposed. The supply lines run on a 400 mile stretch of crap road between Kuwait and Baghdad. Once the British are gone, there won’t be much protection for those supply lines in the south. The insurgents can begin cutting those lines and encircling Baghdad. The “surge” troops weren’t meant to reinforce Baghdad, they were meant to displace the British in the South. Or if they went to Baghdad, others would shift south. That’s what the “surge” was all about, I think.
February 21st, 2007 at 10:42 amHere is how you poke a hole in the White House spin.
February 21st, 2007 at 10:51 amIf Britain is leaving Iraq because things are going so well in Basra, then why doesn’t Britain accompany us in Bahgdad instead of leaving Iraq complletely?
You know, we could really use the help!
What message does it send our troops that Britain is unwilling to take part in our “surge”?
JUST ANNOUNCED DANISH TROOPS ALSO TO LEAVE IRAQ …….
Comment by Tobey Tall — February 21, 2007 @ 8:13 am
Until this posting, did anyone in liberal media ever point out that Denmark had troops in Iraq? The fact that the U.S. had support was never important to the media (weren’t we going it alone), now that those before unmentioned troops are leaving, the information becomes very important.
February 21st, 2007 at 1:59 pmThe real story here, that you won’t consider, is Basra is secure. You could argue that the British had an easier task in Basra than we do in Baghdad or that the British have just been more effective. What it does show is that securing Iraq is possible. Although progressives are resistant to any outcome in Iraq that would vindicate the Bush Administration, persevering in Iraq and providing a secure, democratic Baghdad (as an alternative to surrendering it to a jihad friendly theocracy) is a viable option.
February 21st, 2007 at 2:08 pmCash Advance Loan
Cash loans aid loan seekers by certainly removing hassles from the process quick and problemless.
March 23rd, 2008 at 12:10 amPayday Advance Loan
April 1st, 2008 at 1:14 am