Report: New security agreement may see combat troops withdraw within Iraq
posted at 9:30 pm on August 13, 2008 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
An apparent compromise on last week’s proposal that would have had all combat troops out by 2010, conditions permitting. The new plan: Combat troops out of the country by 2011 (again, conditions permitting) but out of the cities next summer, with the departure date for residual forces TBD. If the current troop presence is like training wheels, this is like taking the wheels off but running alongside the bike. The point is to be as close as possible to catch it in case it starts to topple over.
In one of the most detailed insights yet into the content of the deal, Hoshyar Zebari, the Iraqi Foreign Minister, has also told The Times that the US military would be barred from unilaterally mounting attacks inside Iraq from next year…
The terms of the deal can be reviewed within one or two years, subject to the approval of both sides - which ensures that the next US Administration will not be bound by the conditions…
The “time horizon” for the exit of US troops would depend upon the ability of the Iraqi police and army to maintain security gains in Iraq after a surge of US forces in 2007 helped to push violence to its lowest levels in 4½ years.
“We are talking about combat troops, maybe in 2010-11, there could be drawdowns,” Mr Zebari said, confirming that this was referred to in the draft accord…
The draft accord also refers to the prospect of US troops beginning to exit small bases set up inside various cities in Iraq to larger camps outside from next summer - which could be as early as June - depending on the security situation.
“The idea is really to keep these forces outside the main cities, the population centres. It doesn’t mean that they could not enter or come through,” the Foreign Minister said.
It’s an experiment in sovereignty, in other words (particularly the boldfaced detail), which tries to solve the problem in Obama’s strategy of withdrawing to regional bases and then sending forces back into the country if need be to tamp down any fundie flare-ups. You can’t transgress a border like that without re-offending national pride; from within the country, though, with a troop presence that’s out of sight but not completely out of mind, you have a bit more leeway to intervene. Seems like a reasonable enough compromise to me, especially paired with the fact that it doesn’t allow for permanent bases, but maybe I missed something. Flashback video for you from February to consider while you mull.
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
I think they should redeploy to Okinawa.
jgapinoy on August 13, 2008 at 9:39 PM
I don’t understand the point with the videos. Obama was talking about withdrawing from Iraq — not staying in Iraq but leaving the major cities.
amerpundit on August 13, 2008 at 9:42 PM
Follow the jihadis and crush them everywhere.
Or wait for their Koranic terror.
Obama prefers waffles.
profitsbeard on August 13, 2008 at 9:42 PM
How about redeploying to Georgia? j/k :)
ThePrez on August 13, 2008 at 9:43 PM
Yeah, that’s my point — how silly his plan was. McCain’s point was, why withdraw when you know there’s a threat there? Better to stand guard from within the country than pull out.
Allahpundit on August 13, 2008 at 9:46 PM
Kinda figured our troops would go back to the ‘few large bases’ stradegy before leaving, IF they leave at all. The ‘many small bases’ strategy worked for the change in tactics, going after and clearing out a.q. then staying to keep ‘em out. But after the I.A. takes over the many small bases, it makes perfect sense for us to go back to the few large bases. Just like Dubya said ‘When Iraq stands up, we’ll stand down.’
Tony737 on August 13, 2008 at 9:46 PM
Count me in the WTF crowd. If the Iraqi forces can control the country then fine but if not this is down right stuuuuupid. Forting up alows a small insurgent force to concentrate talent and lob crap over the ‘wire’ and then disappear. You can’t retaliate without hitting civies. Keeping our forces deployed across the country makes the enemy do the same, and lowers his hitting power. I just don’t like this forting up concept at all.
Limerick on August 13, 2008 at 9:50 PM
It’s been working in Germany, Japan, and all over the world where our brave men and women have given them the “responsibility” of freedom for some time………… and then there is an odd consequence…… jobs. Good jobs. Good paying jobs, a chance for Citizenship, help when ever a tragedy occurs, we are always there, ever notice that? ……..
Then you see where we have been asked to leave, and the United States checks it’s options, then just leaves………..
(Crickets chirp)
“…………. HEY wait a minute, where did the Americans go?”
Seven Percent Solution on August 13, 2008 at 9:53 PM
I just don’t like this forting up concept at all. - Limey
True, that’s why it shouldn’t be done until the Iraqis are ready, and not a day before.
Tony737 on August 13, 2008 at 9:54 PM
Seven% is right, that very thing happened at the base in England I was stationed at in the late 80s.
Yanks go home! Wait, they DID? But, how will my store stay in business?
Tony737 on August 13, 2008 at 9:58 PM
Yeah, I understand the Yankee trade concept but what kind of trade is there really going to be in an Islamic country?
Bars, brothels and dependent housing areas are out. The odd rug and trinket, maybe, but that is probably about it. The only economic impact would be from military contracting (but then again good old Uncle likes to pork out the locals-excuse the term pork).
Limerick on August 13, 2008 at 10:01 PM
Philippines, too.
What base were you at? I was at RAF Lakenheath 1980-82.
jgapinoy on August 13, 2008 at 10:02 PM
Yeah that my point…
Allahpundit on Aug 13,2008 at 9:46PM.
Allahpundit: And don’t forget Hopey/Changeys vision of
Team America, crack commando squad on a hair
triggers notice 24/7, in case of a Jihadys
uprising!
canopfor on August 13, 2008 at 10:03 PM
Don’t you think ‘as conditions warrant’ means if the Iraqi army can keep a lid on security? I doubt any in Iraq want al Qaeda to come back, least of all the people.
tarpon on August 13, 2008 at 10:15 PM
What base were you at? - Pinoy
I was stationed at RAF Welford, it was a tiny little base with no runway, but it was a HUGE AMMO base, and we lived at RAF Greenham Common (the one with the anti-nuke protestors) because Welford was too small to house us. I was there during Desert Storm. Greenham was right outside a town called Newbury, the people wanted us out, but when we did close the base, they all cried for their economy. Greenham had a huge runway, it was an emergency landing strip for the Space Shuttle. The Brits COULD’VE turned the base into a local airport, but instead they turned it into grazing fields for their sheep. Duh.
Tony737 on August 13, 2008 at 10:19 PM
Sounds like the Gavin plan.
MB4 on August 13, 2008 at 10:23 PM
Yeah, we had the anti-nuke protesters at Lakenheath, too. “American GIs–oversexed, overpaid, & over here!”
Early Gore disciples. Wait–don’t sheep exude a lot of methane? heh.
jgapinoy on August 13, 2008 at 10:24 PM
jgapinoy on August 13, 2008 at 9:39 PM
Is that you Murtha?
Chuck145 on August 13, 2008 at 10:25 PM
Ah, sorry. I spent a chunk of the day reading lefty blogs.
amerpundit on August 13, 2008 at 10:27 PM
“American GIs–oversexed, overpaid, & over here!”
HA! I used to answer:
“Overpaid” - Because we’re a CAPITALIST country and we can afford it …
“Oversexed” - Because your women can’t resist us …
“And over here” - Because if we weren’t, YOU’D be saying that about the Germans.
Yeah, they had sense of humor after that! haha
Tony737 on August 13, 2008 at 10:30 PM
I don’t think you get the big picture. The idea is to allow a US presence but turn a greater amount of day-to-day security over to the Iraqis but with back-up.
Here in New Orleans, three years after the storm, the National Guard still “occupies” a huge part of the city because the NOPD is still utterly incapable of dealing with the very basics of law enforcement. If a major city in America needs time to recover from the complete breakdown in the rule of law, why is it so inconceivable that the US will need to keep a continued presence after forces begin to leave the Iraqi cities? You do realize that the Dems claims of perpetual occupation were all BS, right?
highhopes on August 13, 2008 at 10:30 PM
Early Gore disciples. - Pinoy
Just like the P.I. when Subic Bay and Clarke were shut down, it was bad politics, bad strategy and bad economics.
Tony737 on August 13, 2008 at 10:32 PM
Yes, he was the “expert” I was citing. hawhawhaw
jgapinoy on August 13, 2008 at 10:35 PM
Right. “Come back, ‘Cano! We didn’t mean it!” : )
jgapinoy on August 13, 2008 at 10:37 PM
The Iraqi elections to be held next year are the biggest threat to Maliki’s government.
We won’t get to overturn another elected government like we did in Palestine.
Our troops might as well come home and save the trouble(and cost…man, do they cost…).
alphie on August 13, 2008 at 10:38 PM
Actually we are. At least making plans to increase Navy presence there.
highhopes on August 13, 2008 at 10:46 PM
Just like P.I.
jgapinoy on Aug 13,2008 at 10:37PM.
jgapinoy: I’m shocked,shocked I tell ya!
Oh,my freaggin ears!
Prince Edward Island,that real close to Newfy
territory,kinda Quebec-wa Frenchies!
Its not Ontario,haha,bash away,I’ll help! haha:)
canopfor on August 13, 2008 at 10:48 PM
Nice to see you, pal! How was your time working the phones for Pelosi today?
jgapinoy on August 13, 2008 at 10:48 PM
Huh?
jgapinoy on August 13, 2008 at 10:49 PM
Really? Excellent! Taiwan needs us in the region.
jgapinoy on August 13, 2008 at 10:50 PM
Our troops…
alphie on Aug 13,2008 at 10:38PM.
alphie: There cutting back on cross’s in the urine jar arts!
That will save an ungawdly amount of cash,and even
free up more money for the US Military!
What say you!
canopfor on August 13, 2008 at 10:53 PM
So we WILL be there for 100 years or more. Bring on WalMart! McDonald’s!
Southern pork bbq! Petco! Cable! The DMV! Lawyers! Rap music! MTV/BET/VH1! Ann Coulter (burqa-less with a black mini!)!!SouthernGent on August 13, 2008 at 10:53 PM
Yup, sounds like General James Gavin’s enclave proposal for Vietnam. Close enough. Deja vu.
MB4 on August 13, 2008 at 10:54 PM
I like this plan.
Maquis on August 13, 2008 at 10:54 PM
alphie on August 13, 2008 at 10:38 PM
Save us some future entitlement money and hang youself!
dmann on August 13, 2008 at 10:55 PM
Huh
jgapinoy on Aug 13,2008 at 10:49PM.
jgapinoy: You were talking about P.I.(Prince Edward Island)?
canopfor on August 13, 2008 at 10:57 PM
Ooohhhhhhhhhhhhh.
Um, wouldn’t that be P.E.I.?
jgapinoy on August 13, 2008 at 10:59 PM
oooooooohhhhhh
Um,wouldn’t that be P.E.I
jgapinoy on Aug 13,2008 at 10:59PM.
jgapinoy: Um,ya that would be right,me thinks I got lost
in translation,like an F-14 Tomcat with the after-
burner a lit(as i flies over canopfors head,and
misses the point!)duh! :)
canopfor on August 13, 2008 at 11:04 PM
Actually we are. At least making plans to increase Navy presence there. - High
Don’t forget the Special Ops and CIA guy there to help the P.I. to crush the A.S.!
Tony737 on August 13, 2008 at 11:08 PM
CanOp, in this case, the P.I. means Philippine Islands.
Tony737 on August 13, 2008 at 11:10 PM
This agreement still flies in the face of what Obama’s core disciples want,total withdrawl.Even though they have reversed themselves and sided with Obama’s move toward Bush’s “withdrawl based on conditions on the ground”,it will still leave a significant level of troops in Iraq.
How much more disappointment can Obama’s base take from him (changing on wiretapping,gun control,campaign finance,drilling for oil,NAFTA).
His positions parallel Bush’s more and more everyday except by silly little word games that his campaign plays to try and show a difference between them.
Maliki was his buddy a couple of weeks ago,it looks like he’s under the bus now.
If Powell endorses him and Obama goes with it,the Kos crowd will go crazy.The only thing left is maybe he could announce
Cheney as his running mate.
If Obama wins, I just don’t see him being able to change anything significant in this agreement without bringing on a lot of headaches between the Iraqi leadership and DC.
This does enable them to blame problems that could arise with the this agreement on Bush later on which fits perfectly in their only platform that democrats can come together on,Blaming Bush.
Obama loves his poll numbers too much to let things go down
hill in Iraq after the incredible success that the surge has
brought,so liberals need to get out there tissue because they have given their money and votes only to be bitc$ slapped again like they were with hopes of:
Impeaching Bush
Ending the war
Plame gate
NSA wiretapping
Haliburton conspiracies
Prosecuting for war crimes
Torture allegations
Bush did 9/11
And all the other cut and paste conspiracy theories and propaganda that the super intelligent liberals have pushed
in their pathetic little war on Bush.
Barack W. Bush?
By Victor Davis Hanson
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/07/barack_w_bush.html
How twisted do you have to be when freeing 25 million people from a genocidal terrorist dictator and winning the insurgency is bad for the political party you are aligned with.
democrats suck.
Baxter Greene on August 13, 2008 at 11:12 PM
Republicans freed 40 million people over the last few years.
Dhimmicrats and their beloved abortion industry has murdered 40 million in America alone since they started up in the 70’s.
Equivalence?
Mojave Mark on August 13, 2008 at 11:33 PM
Still the same plan that existed last September and was briefed to congress. Following that plan, the US will be down to 10 combat brigades in overwatch by July 2008. Barring any hickups…
DJ Elliott on August 13, 2008 at 11:45 PM
Surely, you aren’t including the woman of Iraq and Afghanistan in your silly total, are you Mojave?
You guys have doomed them to Sharia subservience.
Call it a push for the Republicans, eh?
alphie on August 14, 2008 at 1:14 AM
last I saw their fingers were just as purple as the men after the election… we only liberate, we don’t tell them how to live… that should be their choice. if they choose a theocracy then they choose a theocracy…
Kaptain Amerika on August 14, 2008 at 1:37 AM
The economic hits Krauthammer mentions like the G-8 and WTO might sting a bit but otherwise there’s not much else we can do other than arm the Georgians.
Yakko77 on August 14, 2008 at 2:11 AM
Gah, posted that last comment in the wrong spot. sorry.
Yakko77 on August 14, 2008 at 2:12 AM
Seems reasonable.
Terrye on August 14, 2008 at 6:33 AM
alphie:
Once again, you are stupid. Like you care about the women of Iraq.
Terrye on August 14, 2008 at 6:34 AM
Yes, we could redeploy them to Georgia. I’m sure the folks in Macon, Savannah and Jekyll Island won’t mind.
Bigfoot on August 14, 2008 at 9:11 AM
I’m OK with any withdrawal/redeployment plan as long as it is drawn up by Iraqis rather than beltway Democrats.
Kafir on August 14, 2008 at 9:21 AM
Uh, anyone who thought the Iraqi bargaining posture of “all US forces out” of recent memory was serious is not being realistic. The Maliki government or any other coalition - Shi’a-dominated or otherwise, though it’s unlikely any other sort would emerge any time soon - will not push US forces out of the country for the foreseeable future. Common sense. US forces will be the guarantor of a new order - at least of law and order in a fundamental sense, against insurgency or terrorism or large-scale foreign intervention by Iran - indefinitely.
This is quite obvious and utterly conventional. Folks ought to really get a little more serious about these matters, and not just take the transparently tactical utterances of Iraqi leaders at face value.
It’s tremendously in the interest of the US to keep a significant force presence in Iraq, it’s equally in Iraq’s interest, if for different reasons (i.e., their own behinds). It’s extremely unlikely US forces will be out of Iraq anytime soon.
IceCold on August 14, 2008 at 1:55 PM