WaPo lead story: Troop cuts in Iraq planned!!!!

Troop cuts in Iraq planned!!!!
by EZ writer
Tue Nov 22, 2005 at 08:28:15 PM PDT
WaPo lead story: The Pentagon is tentatively planning substantial troop drawdowns in Iraq for early next year.

WaPo will soon have this (not on its Web site yet):

WASHINGTON--Barring any major surprises in Iraq, the Pentagon tentatively plans to reduce the number of U.S. forces there early next year by as many as three combat brigades, from 18 now, but to keep at least one brigade ``on call'' in Kuwait in case more troops are needed quickly, several senior military officers said.

Pentagon authorities also have set a series of ``decision points'' during 2006 to consider further force cuts that, under a ``moderately optimistic'' scenario, would drop the total number of troops from more than 150,000 now to fewer than 100,000, including 10 combat brigades, by the end of the year, the officers said.


Will major troop drawdowns next year defuse Iraq as a campaign issue?
That may depend on whether U.S. fatalities in Iraq decline. That MAY not happen.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/11/22/222815/13

.. just in time for elections 06.

Going into Iraq was timed perfectly for 2002 so leaving Iraq is timed perfectly for 2006 and than the presidential election they can run on that as well as "spreading democracy". Maybe this is why John Murtha spoke up now? :shrug:

According to the article there will be 100,000 troops in Iraq at the end of 2006 (approx. 2 months after the election.) While that would be a reduction by more than 1/3 from current troop levels, 100,000 is still a substantial number of soldiers to have in Iraq. There is nothing which indicates that American troops during the '06 elections won't be fighting and dying with the same frequency as they are today.

It was already planned that they would cut troop levels afterwards.

things will just get worse for the soldiers who are left there because there will be LESS of them to fight the "insurgents."

Get them ALL out ... NOW!

It seems that the US/UK Forces will pull out in a major way by mid '06. A consensus of this is building with the Repubs, Dems in the US, the UK Govt. and the Iraqi Govt.

The remaining troops will keep a low profile on their bases.

That many dying for lies cannot be undone.

The war will still be a bitter subject for many in 2008. The GOP can't redeem itself that easily.

thanks should go to Murtha, not the Harebrain in the WH.

:grr:

6 months.

This is asking for a conditionnal withdrawal in an unknown time. (Nothing to do with anything a Dem has offered to my knowledge).

Rummy announced the same thing on Sunday.

Bush and Cheney have egg on their face.

Iraq at the end of 2006.

Kuwait or "over the horizon" if needed.

If the Iraqis want us out of there, I doubt very seriously there will be 100,000 troops there at the end of 2006.

it still took years. Election '06 ploy...but I would like nothing better, than it to be true.

and was talking the other day about how a bridgade could be taken out if the Iraqis had, let's say, a few up and running.....

Now at Raw Story

Iraq by 50,000 towards end of '06
RAW STORY

Barring any major surprises in Iraq, the Pentagon tentatively plans to reduce the number of U.S. forces there early next year by as many as three combat brigades, from 18 now, but to keep at least one brigade "on call" in Kuwait in case more troops are needed quickly, several senior military officers tell the WASHINGTON POST for Wednesday editions, RAW STORY has learned. Excerpts.

Pentagon authorities also have set a series of "decision points" during 2006 to consider further force cuts that, under a "moderately optimistic" scenario, would drop the total number of troops from more than 150,000 now to fewer than 100,000, including 10 combat brigades, by the end of the year, the officers said.

Despite an intensified congressional debate about a withdrawal timetable after last week's call by Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., for a quick pullout, administration officials say that military and political factors heavily constrain how fast U.S. forces should leave. They cite a continuing need to assist Iraq's fledgling security forces, ensure establishment of a permanent government, suppress the insurgency and reduce the potential for civil war.

U.S. military commanders, too, continue to favor a gradual, phased reduction, saying that too rapid a departure would sacrifice strategic gains made over the past 30 months and provide a propaganda windfall to insurgents.
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/WaPo_U.S._eyes_reducing_troops_in_1122.html

Pure and simple.

..."cut and run" just in time for the midterms.

I can't wait for the "victory parade."

"Mission Accomplished part two".

Doesn't sound manly to me. I say, keep it in there, get the job done!

3 Brigades May Be Cut in Iraq Early in 2006
Some U.S. Troops Would Stay 'On Call' in Kuwait

By Bradley Graham and Robin Wright
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, November 23, 2005; Page A01

Barring any major surprises in Iraq, the Pentagon tentatively plans to reduce the number of U.S. forces there early next year by as many as three combat brigades, from 18 now, but to keep at least one brigade "on call" in Kuwait in case more troops are needed quickly, several senior military officers said.

Pentagon authorities also have set a series of "decision points" during 2006 to consider further force cuts that, under a "moderately optimistic" scenario, would drop the total number of troops from more than 150,000 now to fewer than 100,000, including 10 combat brigades, by the end of the year, the officers said.


Despite an intensified congressional debate about a withdrawal timetable after last week's call by Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) for a quick pullout, administration officials say that military and political factors heavily constrain how fast U.S. forces should leave. They cite a continuing need to assist Iraq's fledgling security forces, ensure establishment of a permanent government, suppress the insurgency and reduce the potential for civil war.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/22/AR2005112202086.html