Breaking: Blair to announce timetable for British withdrawal from Iraq; Update: 1,600 troops out
posted at 5:32 pm on February 20, 2007 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
I guess he couldn’t hold out forever. 1,500 troops out in a few weeks with more to follow, says the Beeb.
Basra’s in the southern Shiite part of the country. You can guess who’s going to fill the power vacuum there now, but even so, these two pieces from the Telegraph are must-reads if you missed them a few weeks ago.
Looking for details. Standby.
Update: The first Telegraph article says 3,000 troops were supposed to redeploy to a base outside of Basra by May. The Beeb says 1,500 are coming all the way home “within weeks” with a total of 3,000 home by Christmas. Quote: “Our correspondent said senior Whitehall sources told him that the pullout was ’slightly slower’ than they had expected and ‘if conditions worsen this process could still slow up.’”
Update: By Christmas?
Reports circulating in Whitehall tonight suggested that Britain’s 7,000 contingent in Iraq could be cut to around 4,000 by the early summer.
Several battalions which had been due to go to Iraq in May during the next rotation of troops - replacing troops returning home - will stay in Britain…
Operation Sinbad - to transfer the lead role to homegrown forces - was complete and had been successful.
A “substantial” force will remain behind at the base at Basra airport, according to the Telegraph.
Update: Meanwhile, in Baghdad: “Don’t just fire back, crush the place where the fire came from. Don’t treat them with leniency. This is an armored vehicle here, use it.”
Update: Flip flop:
As recently as late last month, Blair rejected opposition calls to withdrawal British troops by October, calling such a plan irresponsible.
“That would send the most disastrous signal to the people that we are fighting in Iraq. It’s a policy that, whatever its superficial attractions may be, is actually deeply irresponsible,” Blair said on Jan. 24 in the House of Commons.
What explains the reversal? This, probably.
Update: The Guardian’s hearing differently from the BBC: they say only 1,000 will be withdrawn by early summer (with everyone out by the end of 2008), and only to a base outside Basra.
Update 2/21: The actual numbers: 1,600 troops out soon (U.S. sources say it’ll be by May), leaving behind 5,500 in a support role. The Brits formally handed Basra over to the Iraqi military last week.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Tony goes wobbly
JackStraw on February 20, 2007 at 5:37 PM
I guess he finally got wobbly. However, he did hold up quite a long time.
Matticus Finch on February 20, 2007 at 5:37 PM
Missed it by that much!
Matticus Finch on February 20, 2007 at 5:38 PM
Is a surge really a surge if everyone else reduces by the amount that we increase?
At some point, the U.S. is going to catch a break, right?
JadeNYU on February 20, 2007 at 5:39 PM
From what I’ve seen lately, those troops are sorely needed back home to quell the thousands of muslim radicals living in the UK.
fogw on February 20, 2007 at 5:43 PM
Well, look at this way - if British troops pull out and the power vacuum in Basra is filled with sectarian militias and Iranian agents, it will be proof-positive that precipitious withdrawal of U.S. forces will only lead to tragedy. The left will have to acknowledge that withdrawal is a foolish option, which will force them to come up with serious strategies for a successful outcome in Iraq.
Oh, who the hell am I kidding? Bush knew.
Enrique on February 20, 2007 at 5:43 PM
How long until England is an outpost of the new Ottoman Empire?
Theworldisnotenough on February 20, 2007 at 5:45 PM
HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA.
Ahem.
Enrique on February 20, 2007 at 5:45 PM
You know the unit coming home first is the one the Prince was going to join.
Heh.
Iblis on February 20, 2007 at 5:58 PM
he held out longer under worse pressure from both parties then Bush probably would’ve. Its a pity but thanks for holding on for so long.
I wonder if Prince William heading to Iraq has something to do with this
Defector01 on February 20, 2007 at 6:11 PM
Maybe this is why we, a small group of colonies, with men wearing rags, carrying muskets and pitchforks, were able to defeat the, then, most powerful nation in the world. We stand our ground. We make the decisions that are right, not just popular.
amerpundit on February 20, 2007 at 6:28 PM
Er, how so? Bush is putting more troops in while Blair pulls his out and Bush is under enormous pressure from just about everyone. Bush may not be great on everything but he has stood rock solid on Iraq. For that alone, he has earned my respect.
JackStraw on February 20, 2007 at 6:34 PM
Iblis, is this true about the first unit home is going to be Prince Harry’s? Well, I wouldn’t be surprised by that at all. However, that being said, he did hold out much longer than I thought he ever would. I know his time is growing short and he will be missed. I find it hard to diss him though, he’s been a great friend to this country.
OTH I think Enrique has a point as does Worldisnotenough, about Britain being the new Muslim emprire. I guess he has enough on his hands with the homefront.
Well, Amerpundit you’ve hit it on the head. Great post.
Catie96706 on February 20, 2007 at 6:38 PM
I’m another that is not surprised at this. My only surprise is that they lasted as long as they did.
Still, I have to wonder how much of this decision is based on Murtha’s (and Pelosi’s) defeatist ‘writing on the wall’ rather than just internal British politics.
LegendHasIt on February 20, 2007 at 6:46 PM
Bush at least has a strong backing of people; US. We back victory in Iraq and we’ve been unwaivering in that.
Blair has NO base of support in his or in the other party, almost everyone HATES the war there and thinks less of Blair for that then anything else.
Defector01 on February 20, 2007 at 6:46 PM
*yawn*
More capitulation by the capitulators. So weak, so predictable… my liberal co-worker is thrilled at this news.
NTWR on February 20, 2007 at 6:50 PM
In fairness to Blair, whom I loathe, public opinion is forcing him to this. I’m surprised he’s been able to hold on so long and is still PM. You have to remember that Stanley Baldwin, Neville Chamberlain, Lord Halifax were all doing what the British public demanded of them.
aengus on February 20, 2007 at 6:54 PM
aengus, I quite agree.
Actually, I’m not believing this until I read about it in the The Times (of London) as this bad news comes from the BadnewsBroadcastingCorporation.
Both Prince William and Harry are supposedly getting ready to deploy to Iraq…
Tony has political pressures at home (viz. the peerages for cash scandal), but they’re almost separate and apart from the stand he knows the UK has to make beside America in the War on Terror and Blair knows that any announced timetable for withdrawal will only give the takfiris a-heads-up on when to strike.
Jen the Neocon on February 20, 2007 at 7:00 PM
It’s true that Bush has more support than Blair but it’s kind of splitting hairs. Both gov’ts are very unpopular largely because of the war and both represent majorities that want their military out of Iraq.
But Bush is increasing the number of troops because he hasn’t wavered under intense pressure. After last November, the path of least resistance would have been to say the people have spoken and pulled the troops. Blair is drawing down troops which means he either doesn’t believe in the mission or is doing what we slam the left of wanting to do, cut and running before the mission is complete.
Blair has no political future and will be off the world stage soon. I had hoped he would go out strong rather than roll over.
JackStraw on February 20, 2007 at 7:32 PM
Catie96706,
Thank You. In my opinion, there are too many Neville Chamberlains and Jimmy Carters in this world, and not enough Winston Churchills and Ronald Reagans.
amerpundit on February 20, 2007 at 7:50 PM
Why the hell would anyone here bash Blair? Or England?…..
Eating our own again? Gimme a break. Look at our own politics. Makes me think some here are part of the Ungrateful Nations.
I don’t like the social state they have anymore then the rest of you….but they are there….bleeding too. Remember the posting last month from the Brit soldier’s Dad? Britian has problems we all shake our heads at….so do we.
It is like when I hear people here bash Japan, makes me sick. These people have stood by us. Screw these sour apples that can’t see that.
Limerick on February 20, 2007 at 8:01 PM
The folks at ThinkProgress are positively aglow over this news; they’re all now hoping that we follow suit.
dalewalt on February 20, 2007 at 8:05 PM
Terrorist A to terrorist B: Just like we predicted. The west is weak, and all we had to do was keep blowing up innoccent people and the media and left in these countries would force them to surrender. Game over.
And don’t worry American left and American/World media, the victory you’ve handed the enemy won’t be the greatest recruiting tool the enemy could have hoped for. Of course you knew that, and you knew what you’ve been doing all along… but as long as it hurt Bush at the polls, and as long as in the long run you’re able to win some elections by default, it was all worth it wasn’t it you disgusting POSs.
RightWinged on February 20, 2007 at 8:15 PM
To clarify, above where I said:
That was meant to be about as sarcastic as sarcastic can be… Kind of confusing because right after I changed out of sarcasm mode, and didn’t make it clear.
RightWinged on February 20, 2007 at 8:16 PM
I think everybody’s read enough of your posts to know how you feel about the situation… not to worry.
dalewalt on February 20, 2007 at 8:23 PM
Sorry to see it come to the Brits pulling out, but I thank them for hanging in as long as they did.
America Alone, indeed.
I STILL believe we’re going to win this thing. I’ve been reading the news out of Iraq, and people are going back to their homes by the hundreds in some of what were the most violent and vicious areas of Baghdad.
We’re making progress. Bottom line: it’s going to take time. There’s no way around that.
It would sure be a big help if our politicians and populace would exhibit some maturity and resolve, rather than actively trying to undercut our very difficult, dangerous, and utterly vital objectives.
techno_barbarian on February 20, 2007 at 8:38 PM
I CHALLANG ALL WHO READ HERE TO ATTEND THE PRO-WAR RALLY ON MARCH 17,IN DC AT THE VIETMAN VETRANS WAR MEMORIAL! THE SQUEAKY WHEEL GETS THE OIL! ORGANIZE NOW!
sonnyspats1 on February 20, 2007 at 9:15 PM
How many times will we hear soundbytes from Democrats over the next year in which they use the phrase “Go/going it alone”?
RightWinged on February 20, 2007 at 9:16 PM
This withdrawel is no doubt timed along with England becoming a Muslim state. It should take until 2008 to get all the loos pointing away from Mecca.
Hening on February 20, 2007 at 9:45 PM
God Bless Tony Blair for hanging on as long as he did, as well as the British armed forces. That said, I would love to be able to spit in the face of everey stupid liberal that is, inch by inch, leading our civilisation to annihilation. Bastards.
Darth Executor on February 20, 2007 at 9:54 PM
sonnypats…..
Got my armbands ordered today. St. Pats day ought to be interesting……just wondering how many will show.
Limerick on February 20, 2007 at 10:07 PM
God’s teeth! How about we wait and see, outside of quasi-contradictory press speculation, what really happens? Cripes. I remember the stories of “The Canadians are leaving Afghanistan!!!” - and they are heavily engaged there to this day.
However, I can see why the Brits might want to shift their effort - they, and the Canadians, are making up for the slackers of NATO in Afghanistan. As Her Majety’s forces can all fit in Wembley Stadium, they probably cannot spare much anymore. I’d rather have the RAF Regiment, the Green Howrds, the Sherwood Forresters, et al, staying with us somehwere.
major john on February 20, 2007 at 10:49 PM
Limerickhere”s the link to read any details you need to know. Happy St.Patty’s Day to ya!
sonnyspats1 on February 20, 2007 at 11:12 PM
Amen. Can’t add a word.
Professor Blather on February 20, 2007 at 11:24 PM
The BBC says that the UK is increasing their troop committment to Afghanistan. The UK doesn’t not have a very large army.
In addition, sometime this year, control over the south is to revert to Iraq. The Brits will still keep 3000 troops through the end of 2007.
georgej on February 20, 2007 at 11:25 PM
To Blair and the British military, some deserved gratitude.
To the majority of the “anti-war” British people -enjoy the Caliphate you will inherit for opposing Blair and the British military’s better instincts.
You can’t spell euthanasia without EU.
profitsbeard on February 20, 2007 at 11:54 PM
I constantly bash Blair because the situation in Britian is far more serious than you might imagine. British soldiers are brave and should be remembered for standing up for freedom and sticking by the U.S. Having said all that, there’s not much point increasing troop commitments in Afghanistan when Al Qaeda’s main base is London.
The “social state” of Britain isn’t just a minor deviation from free markets, its a massive economic and cultural appropriation. Blair is selling off the Royal Navy so he can afford to pay for a welfare state. The fact that he won’t confont islamic terrorism in Britain shows a basic lack of nerve.
aengus on February 20, 2007 at 11:57 PM
God Bless you Mr. Blair, along with your troops, and your country. Your lads and ladies did a wonderful job…. I am sure your generals on the ground have trained the locals to take over, and if trouble starts, you have their back.
God Speed Sir, I think your soul needs a rest, their of some of us in America that will always be thankful……
PinkyBigglesworth on February 21, 2007 at 12:08 AM
I just skimmed back over these comments and see people praising the British troops. I’d like to second that, and make clear that my point about the media and the left handing victory to the terrorists was not at all a knock at the British troops. Just pointing out that this is a major victory for the enemy, and it’s about politics, and has nothing to do with a military retreat.
RightWinged on February 21, 2007 at 1:36 AM
Anyone who’s been in Euroland for any length of time is familiar with the ubiquity of utter hatred shown to anyone who supports the war. Blair was an adored, beloved hero up until he stood side by side with W in fighting Islamic terrorism, at which point he became a pariah and target #1 for the “progressives” (and no one in Europe wants be considered as anything other than “progressive”). That he has survived this far is testimony to his guts, but it’s still sad to see him cave. His wife, also, seems to be a moonbat “progressive”, so I imagine he gets an earful every night on the homefront, too. Debate about the war in Europe is confined to which Western leader should first be tried for war crimes (and, more recently, how to save Iran from W). It was nice while it lasted, Tony.
Halley on February 21, 2007 at 2:06 AM
One final point to this thread……..
The Brit’s may be “re-deploying”…… Mr. “Depends”, Ms. “Blinky”, the “Pant Suit” want to “end the war, and re-deploy”….. they are celbrating this evening. But, so are our enemies…..
The only one talking about “Victory”, is President George W. Bush…..
The question that has never been asked or answered, is “who do you come to peace with?”, “Who do you negotiate with?”, “Who do you stop coming to the US to kill us…..”
(even the crickets are silent……….)
PinkyBigglesworth on February 21, 2007 at 2:40 AM
Southern Iraq and the Basra area is pretty peaceful anyway, just like the Kurdish north. British troops will unfortunately be needed more in London than in Basra in the years to come.
Notice how the left adores this move, as do the terrorists? Gee, I wonder why? Anyway, if the terrorists take over Basra when the Tommies leave, we’ll know it was a mistake. If Iraqi troops can maintain peace, we’ll know it was the right time for Britain to pull out.
Tony737 on February 21, 2007 at 8:28 AM
“How long until England is an outpost of the new Ottoman Empire?”
Whaddya mean how long? Across the Atlantic it’s sheer insanity. It’s like your house is infested by rats carrying black death fleas and instead of eradicating the rats, they keep coddling and feeding them because political correctness has turned their brains and spines into mush. Anyone who can’t see the eventual capitulation to muslims is blind.
There are only two options … take your country back, by force if you have too, or submit. There are no other alternatives.
The same pattern is developing here. The same path to destruction. Apparently no one has learned anything from previous conflicts. Everyone waits until it’s too late, then millions die because no one took action when they had the chance too. Dumb asses.
darwin on February 21, 2007 at 8:56 AM
I expect that every man did his duty and it is now time for them to come home. Hopefully, with their troops levels decreasing in Iraq, they can add more troops to Afganistan.
BohicaTwentyTwo on February 21, 2007 at 9:03 AM
I just saw Tony Blair and the House of Commons on C-Span. The conservative party is saying that the media jumped the gun and is calling this a timetable, but Tony makes it clear that he will not do timetables. The troop withdrawal is totally condition-based. He assured the House that he will not withdraw troops so slow that their lives would be more in danger…perhaps a gab at the slow bleed plan of Murtha. But it was clear that this withdrawal and future withdrawals will all be condition-based.
icelandicfarmer on February 21, 2007 at 9:15 AM
No time to read all the posts but I’m wondering if it has anything to do with Harry demanding to go to the front line.
England is becoming a disaster area with all the muslims. Too bad she gave in to them.
PoliticallyIncorrectSandy on February 21, 2007 at 10:46 AM
If we leave why would anyone else want to be there? We are the so-called “super power” … too bad we have little spine left and what’s left has been devoured by the dems.
One Angry Christian on February 21, 2007 at 11:20 AM
Why is this news?
Britain has been withdrawing troops for a long time. From 30K down to 8K and now down to 5K.
The real news, which is not being reported is:
The British mission in southern Iraq has been successful. The southern Iraqi’s aren’t rioting and committing mass terrorism, and they are taking back control of their government and their own security.
Lawrence on February 21, 2007 at 11:39 AM
That’s why I wanted everyone to take a deep breath. AP, you might not want to jump the gun so quick on stories like this - British press afterall…
major john on February 21, 2007 at 1:46 PM
What “reversal?”
These were the British plans as of Jan 11th.
You really need to quit listening to the Moonbat voices in your head, Allahpundit ;-)
Misha I on February 21, 2007 at 2:44 PM
I guess Britain needs the troops back home. It’s like we’re Luther and Vic Fromyer, in Christmas with the Kranks, standing on the other side of the street, watching the other guy standing on a ladder, getting shocked by XMas lights.
amerpundit on February 21, 2007 at 3:20 PM
Um, why is everyone here standing by this story? You all know this is being outrageously misrepresented by the media, right?
Patriot33 on February 22, 2007 at 1:55 AM
I can still say “Thanks,…” can’t I?
PinkyBigglesworth on February 22, 2007 at 3:13 AM