Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

U.S. combat troops to leave all Iraqi cities

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-02-09 09:49 PM
Original message
U.S. combat troops to leave all Iraqi cities

U.S. combat troops to leave all Iraqi cities

Reuters
Tuesday, June 2, 2009

SAMARRA, Iraq (Reuters) - U.S. combat forces will vacate all Iraqi cities on schedule by the end of this month, the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq said Tuesday, including the still violent insurgent holdout of Mosul.

U.S. combat troops are scheduled to leave Iraq's towns and cities by June 30 and redeploy to bases outside, according to a security pact that took effect in January.

<...>

Asked whether U.S. combat forces were on track for a total pullout from all cities, including Mosul, army General Ray Odierno said. "We are. We have done a joint assessment ... We have finalized that."

"We will come out of the cities. We will provide some trainers and advisers, LNOs (liaison officers) ... inside of Mosul ... but that'll be it," he said in an interview.

<...>

U.S. combat forces will leave Iraq by August 2010 under President Barack Obama's plan. Odierno said about 50,000 troops would stay on to train and advise only until the 2011 deadline.

more





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-02-09 09:55 PM
Response to Original message
1. Great news until you ask the question: What is the definition of combat forces?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-05-09 09:57 AM
Response to Reply #1
53. Yesterday on NPR they interviewed a local American commander
who said that all of his troops were being ordered out of the area - that was Mosul.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-02-09 09:57 PM
Response to Original message
2. It's called
Progress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kdillard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-02-09 09:58 PM
Response to Original message
3. Good news. Hopefully things will keep going on schedule.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-02-09 10:00 PM
Response to Original message
4. Blackwater to enter all Iraqi cities.
Excuse me, Xe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-02-09 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Will they become the casualties?
Will the Iraqis allow then to stay? When all the troops are out what next?

If this was a piece announcing all contractors out, there would be a comment speculating why it's not good news.

Troops moving out. Withdrawal appears to be on schedule. Yay!




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-02-09 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. They will become footnotes in an annual report.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-02-09 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. That doesn't answer all the questions:
Will the Iraqis allow them to stay?

I'm trying to understand the concern beyond all troops out of Iraq.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-02-09 10:15 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Who knows? But I think the government and the commercial interests in Iraq will welcome Blackwater.
They can purchase armed muscle to protect their interests without all the political baggage. They can fire them and kick them out whenever they want without the political fallout.

Mercenaries are always welcomed by the moneyed.

This opinion is premised on the assumption that the Iraqi people themselves control neither the government nor the commercial interests.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-02-09 10:19 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Then that's on the Iraqi government. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raine1967 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 06:46 PM
Original message
Can you show a few links to back that accusation up?
I think that is a fair question, no?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 08:48 PM
Response to Original message
14. doubt it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #4
23. Sean Connery to enter your mother, Trebek. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-05-09 09:50 AM
Response to Reply #23
49. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-04-09 01:00 AM
Response to Reply #4
24. You would be right. They've never actually left.
Edited on Thu Jun-04-09 01:12 AM by chill_wind
and many of them will probably just put on new uniforms.

No license, but Blackwater is still in Iraq

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30312789//



WASHINGTON - Armed guards from the security firm once known as Blackwater Worldwide are still protecting U.S. diplomats in Iraq, even though the company has no license to operate there and has been told by the State Department its contracts will not be renewed two years after a lethal firefight that stirred outrage in Baghdad.

Private security guards employed by the company, now known as Xe, are slated to continue ground operations in parts of Iraq long into the summer, far longer than had previously been acknowledged, government officials told The Associated Press.

(...)

Employees may simply change companies
"As Triple Canopy's work expands, the logical place to start looking and interviewing and evaluating employees will be those who are already there, those who have some skills and are already employed by Blackwater," said Alan Chvotkin, a senior vice president and counsel for the trade group Professional Services Council.

Xe, DynCorp and Triple Canopy are all members of the council.

Chvotkin added that in view of the controversies over Blackwater's role, "Triple Canopy and other security companies are making an independent assessment of any individual before deciding whether to hire them."

The Iraqi official also said that some former Blackwater officials could remain in Iraq, depending on their experience.

The transition from Blackwater to a new air security firm may be even more complicated. Chvotkin said it will not be easy to find a firm with Blackwater's air resources. Blackwater should not be ruled out as an option, he said.



NYT: Ex-Blackwater Workers May Return to Iraq Jobs
4/3/2009

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/04/world/middleeast/04blackwater.html?_r=2&scp=1&sq=Ex-Blackwater%20Workers%20May%20Return%20To%20Iraq%20Jobs&st=cse

a little more context:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8447252&mesg_id=8448997
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
backscatter712 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-02-09 10:16 PM
Response to Original message
9. I'll call it progress.
It's not quite as much as we would like, and yes, the rules are being bent, but I'll still call it a solid step towards ending our presence in Iraq.

Wars, I've learned, are difficult to end. They have a life of their own, and the easy thing to do is just to keep fighting, keep sending more soldiers to die, keep spending money, keep fueling the hatreds. Doing what it takes to actually end a war is hard - politicians will always try to take out your knees when you do something to wind things down, they'll try to thwart attempts at negotiating peace, and the military-industrial complex will do everything possible to provoke more hostility - it's good for business.

Given the difficulties involved, yes, I'll give credit where credit is due to President Obama for working to wind down the war in Iraq. I'll temper that by stating the obvious - there's a hell of a lot more work to be done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. Yes. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 06:46 PM
Response to Original message
12. To meet June deadline, US and Iraqis redraw city borders
http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0519/p06s05-wome.html


"Baghdad - On a map of Baghdad, the US Army's Forward Operating Base Falcon is clearly within city limits.

Except that Iraqi and American military officials have decided it's not. As the June 30 deadline for US soldiers to be out of Iraqi cities approaches, there are no plans to relocate the roughly 3,000 American troops who help maintain security in south Baghdad along what were the fault lines in the sectarian war.

"We and the Iraqis decided it wasn't in the city," says a US military official. The base on the southern outskirts of Baghdad's Rasheed district is an example of the fluidity of the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) agreed to late last year, which orders all US combat forces out of Iraqi cities, towns, and villages by June 30..."



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 08:50 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. as long as they both agree, who cares.
Edited on Wed Jun-03-09 08:50 PM by mkultra
maybe your map will be pissed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 09:01 PM
Response to Reply #15
18. Do you think the people in Iraq might have a clue, maybe they care
:shrug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 10:35 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. the part that says "US and Iraqis"
includes the Iraqis
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-04-09 09:29 AM
Response to Reply #21
26. Surely the people in Iraq were aware and agreed to change city limits
in order to comply with the terms of the SOFA.

:sarcasm:



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-04-09 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #26
27. yeah, i hardly believe they care one bit.
Edited on Thu Jun-04-09 11:28 AM by mkultra
If you ask any Iraqi on the street whether he cares about this base on the outskirts being defined as in or out of the city, I bet you $100 they will smirk at you and tell you they don't really care. Only a moron would care about this kind of minutia.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-04-09 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #27
31. Only a moron or those who do not mind being fooled. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-04-09 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #31
34. yes, i agree
only a moron or those who do not mind being fooled would care about this kind of minutia.

Thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-04-09 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #34
40. If Bush had agreed to alter the city limits and the headline was that
the terms had been met, most people on DU would probably take a different view.

I see nothing wrong with trying to hold everyone to the same standards.

We've beaten this horse enough.

:)





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-04-09 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #40
42. Bush was a liar and he was judged by that standard
If your saying that Obama is a liar, i suggest you throw off the veil and announce it honestly. Otherwise i would appreciate you take your right wing bullshit elsewhere.

Now the proper horse has been beaten.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-04-09 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #42
45. You are taking a gigantic leap here about RW bullshit and veils...
I'll leave you to your own imagination.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-05-09 09:47 AM
Response to Reply #45
48. your the one making Obama out into a liar.
Edited on Fri Jun-05-09 09:48 AM by mkultra
Not me. No, i will not judge him on the same standards i judged Bush. No, its not the right thing to do. No, i don't care if its partisan. Bush was a liar from start to finish. We doubted his hedging because of that reason. If you doubt things of this nature because of the same reason, then perhaps you shouldn't be here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 06:47 PM
Response to Original message
13. YES!
I'm almost in tears.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 08:51 PM
Response to Original message
16. toall teh negative nannys who bitched
let me be the first to say SUCK IT!.

All in five months with 11 left on the campaign promise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 09:02 PM
Response to Reply #16
19. The SOFA agreement was a campaign promise??? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 10:39 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. nope, and it hasnt been 16 months either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-04-09 09:25 AM
Response to Reply #22
25. No reason to confuse campaign promises with terms of the SOFA nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-04-09 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #25
28. no reason to confuse my post with an implication of fullfillment.
Your predisposition is showing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-04-09 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #28
30. You mentioned campaign promise in your first post....
maybe a predisposition to reading beyond the headline.

:)



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-04-09 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #30
33. i simple pointed out
that there where many months left on a promise for which we are seeing progress. My swipe is really directed at those who would claim Obama has dropped the Iraqi pullout ball.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-04-09 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #33
38. The June 30th deadline has little to do with Obama.
Jeesh! It was negotiated during Bush. Obama's election gave the Iraqi government hope that they would be able to exercise some semblance of autonomy and enforce the June 30th deadline but the negotiations of the SOFA terms started before the primaries and the Iraqi government voted on November 16th 2008 on the June 30th withdrawal and reaffirmed early in May.

"Iraq Government Wants U.S. Troops Out by June 30
The departure of heavily armed combat troops from bases inside the cities is important psychologically to many Iraqis, who are eager to regain control of their country after six years of war and U.S. military occupation."

AP

Monday, May 04, 2009

"BAGHDAD -- Iraq's government Monday ruled out allowing U.S. combat troops to remain in Iraqi cities after the June 30 deadline for their withdrawal, despite concern that Iraqi forces cannot cope with the security challenge following a resurgence of bombings in recent weeks.

Asking U.S. forces to stay in the cities, including volatile Mosul in the north, would be embarrassing for Iraq's prime minister, who has staked his political future on claims that the country has turned the corner in the war against Sunni and Shiite extremists."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-04-09 07:27 PM
Response to Reply #33
39. And I simply pointed out that the terms were part of the SOFA and
had nothing to do with a campaign promise, the OP was about withdrawing troops from the cities...part of the SOFA.

I guess when someone replies to an OP with unrelated facts, others might point that out.

:shrug:







Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-04-09 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #39
43. i had neglected the SOFA fact
but it is immaterial to my original point which is that the negative bitches who have claimed he has turned away from withdrawal should take note. Its a hope skip and a jump to combat troop withdrawal which he has 11 more months to reach.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-04-09 07:59 PM
Response to Reply #43
44. Exactly, the 6/30 date came from the SOFA not a campaign promise
and that is all I pointed out.

Maybe your post should have been in another thread.

:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-05-09 09:46 AM
Response to Reply #44
47. lol, maybe YOURS should have been on another post
I made my point clear and you dragged it into this SOFA argument, which if you check will see that i agreed was not a campaign promise. My point stands even if you misread it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 08:52 PM
Response to Original message
17. Nice to hear - recommended
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 09:05 PM
Response to Original message
20. Rec'd. Another promise fulfilled. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-04-09 11:40 AM
Response to Original message
29. In his Cairo speech, he said ALL troops will leave by 2012. Take that naysayers!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-04-09 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #29
37. I will believe it when I see it.
Already we know that:

1 ) City boundaries are being redrawn to accommodate a warped definition of "withdrawal"

2 ) Triple Canopy received a 1 year contract in 2009 to take over from Blackwater with an additional 4 years year-to-year option.

3 ) Combat troops are being reclassified as "trainers" & "advisers" and will remain in Iraq under that classification.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-04-09 07:36 PM
Response to Reply #37
41. Quotes and links to credible sources?
Edited on Thu Jun-04-09 07:36 PM by ClarkUSA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-05-09 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #37
51. Sounds like akward criticism to me
Number one doesn't matter as long as the troops are out of the cities.

number to would be understandable considering there are still significant interests that the Iraqi government may want help protecting. I think you should still prove your assertion though.

number 3 is also acceptable. We should remain to advise them on military topics.

SO, whats your point?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cwcwmack Donating Member (369 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-04-09 04:37 PM
Response to Original message
32. 'bout time... nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-04-09 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #32
36. It's not " 'bout time." It's ON time based on what he stated to us months ago.
Edited on Thu Jun-04-09 06:10 PM by vaberella
So the snide comment is unnecessary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-05-09 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #32
52. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-04-09 06:09 PM
Response to Original message
35. I can't REC ---damn I missed this thread. Sorry Prosense. Thanks for the news.
:woohoo: I love our Pres.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-04-09 08:22 PM
Response to Original message
46. Sounds like our forces are only there to deter an invasion or massive instability
as opposed to dealing with the urban insurgency.

this is quite a change from the previous administration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-05-09 09:50 AM
Response to Original message
50. There is no such thing as good Obama news on DU - that's how I know this post is a lie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-05-09 09:58 AM
Response to Original message
54. A significant step to be followed by more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 02:34 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC