WAR: Iraqi PM requests US Troop Withdrawal

The Iraqi pm has asked for the speedy withdrawal of US troops from Iraq "allegedly". An interesting development given the current situation out there!....The idea of an imminent transition from US to Iraqi troops can't be argued with, the details need clarifying though.



It's interesting they have asked for the speedy withdrawal of US troops, i can understand the reasoning, but given the current levels of insurgency out there i'm surprised by the timing!....if the transition is for the troops attempting to keep law and order, therefore their responsiblilty being handed over to the Iraqi's?....what about the many reconstruction projects being carried out over there (alot by the troops).

This is clearly being carried out to quell the insurgency attacks, and i can see the reasoning - but if the troops aren't fully withdrawing then how will this help!...infact it could have the opposite effect of giving the insurgents renewed vigor in their attempt to overthrow the current government!

Also, why just the US, why not ALL coalition troops?

[edit on 27-7-2005 by John bull 1]

I believe these are carefully chosen words by both Ibrahim Jaafari and Donald Rumsfeld in an attempt to curb the insurgency.

Sanc'.

I think by asking for the withdrawal of US troops is where they get the wording wrong to be honest. It puts the emphasise on the US, if the Iraqi government wants the troops out then why not call for the withdrawal of coalition troops.

It's the wording of "US troops" only that makes this look like the US troops are the problem - i think thats an error or judgement, and unnecessary.

Perhaps someone can help me here - i'm pretty new to this board and this is the first thread i've posted. Why haven't i been credited as the author of this thread?....can anyone help me with that?

I think Jafaari might view the presence of American troops in Iraq as a liabilty rather than an asset. If he thinks the insurgency could be tamed at the withdrawal of American forces then he would probably say so, and at the behest of the Americans. They dont lose face if they are asked to leave, and if they do leave and it goes tits up then they wont be held accountable for that, will they?

[edit on 27/7/05 by subz]

The Conspirator, it hasnt been voted up yet. When it does you'll get the credit for the contribution.

You need 20 yes votes to get it voted up from a submission to a news story. If you get no votes they'll detract from the total amount of yes votes.

You should consider fattening up your introductory paragraph and changing the headline to something more informative i.e. Iraqi PM Demands U.S Troop Withdrawal.

Thanks for submitting the story and contributing to ATSNN

[edit on 27/7/05 by subz]

Considering the beef is and ALWAYS HAS BEEN our (our being not their) troop presence on their soil...it's not hard to figure out why the Iraqi authorities might be getting a clue that if we're not there things may very well settle down!

Ah right, thanks for that subz!

I see what your saying aswell about the US pulling out, personnally, i think it will go tits up if the US leave now, it'll also put the British in an impossible position - if they stay to finish their work they'll then be seen as the main occupying force - i think they'll be forced to follow suit prematurely.

It's way to soon to leave in my opinion - regardless of what the Iraqi pm says.

It takes a long time to install the safe-guards in government and security measures to make sure the country isn't thrown into civil war or overthrown.

I think this could backfire on the new Iraqi government!

Its a politcal maneuver/gambit for US, UK, and Coalition nations consumer consumption.
The UK and US have been discussing and formulating when the troops would be pulling out. Varied sources indicate that the time frame was from 12-18 months.

Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari announcement, if proven valid, only shortens the time frame. If proven valid, this is good news to many.





seekerof

[edit on 27-7-2005 by Seekerof]

``

nice, soothing words and ideal to Iraqis (& American voters in 2006 cycle)

alas, Mr Rumsfeld,Mr Cheney, PNAC, neocon agenda and the Bush administration....have a generation long presence in Iraq+middle east
as a strategy & roadmap.

the only 'withdrawl' will be for US forces to redeploy themselves at the permanent bases being created in the deserts.
thereby 'allowing' the new-Iraq army to take limited but expanding responsibilities in the control of the civilian population centers...

This is quite alarming.
While I agree with subz in the presence of our troops provoking attacks,
the attacks will surely not stop when we leave.
They will only increase and the Iraqi's will feel overwhelemed.

I do want our boys to come home, but they can't leave the country.
Pulling out of the the cities urban areas would be greatly appreciated I believe though.
May God bless those men.

When the constitution is drafted & adopted and when a widely elected PM is in office then this request would be valid and should be honored. Until then, carry on men.

Actually, it's not just US troops. John Howard met with the Iraqi PM on the way back home, and he stated that Australian troops wouldn't be needed anymore.

I saw it on the news, but I can't seem to find an online source for it.

I certainly heard rumours of a gradual withdrawal of UK forces was on the cards and being discussed about a month ago. This may go someway to allaying the fears of those suspicious of US/western expansion, then again if things go to **** after they've gone they get accused of creating the mess and washing their hands of it.