It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

U.S. hands over control of Iraq combat operations

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 06:06 AM
link   

U.S. hands over control of Iraq combat operations


www.cnn.com

Iraqi commandos showed off skills they learned from U.S. military forces, who Saturday formally handed over control of combat operations to Iraqi security forces.
The top U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. Raymond Odierno, was on hand to watch the final American combat team, the 4th Brigade of the 2nd Infantry Division, tender responsibilities to the 6th Iraqi Army Division.
President Barack Obama has ordered the current 64,000-strong U.S. presence to be down to 50,000 by September 1.
Six U.S. brigades will remain to provide support to Iraqi soldiers and police.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.reuters.com




posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 06:06 AM
link   
What this means in my eyes is that we are treating Iraq like post-cold war Germany. Which in many ways is good and bad.

Good news is the US won't be out there very much now. We'll be in our castles that are bases. Bad news is we probably will never leave.

This makes Iraq our Visigoths, if you with. Civilized barbarians to manage our former territories afar.

What are you're all thoughts about it?

www.cnn.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 8-8-2010 by Gorman91]



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 06:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


I see the possibility of Iran moving into Iraq whilst chasing rebel Kurds. The Iranian forces will make contact with Iraqi security and the newly smaller US forces. And there's a catalyst for the US-Iran War. It could quite possibly be a false-flag attempt using the same tactics NAZI Germany used against Poland at the start of WWII.

It's baiting Iran into doing something that would allow the US to justify military action against them.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 06:38 AM
link   
reply to post by mistafaz
 


Honestly their army is a joke and we wouldn't have to do a thing beyond air force. We could destroy Iran's army today and never invade. That would be a strong enough message. Destroying an army but not invading is a message that says we don't want you, we just want you to listen. This was half-done in Iraq in the 90s. We did not conquer them. We simply bombed and half-invaded. If we'd just bombed it would still work.

Only a fool would occupy Iran. There is no logic to it. Simply bombing the targets and ignoring them is enough.

[edit on 8-8-2010 by Gorman91]



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 06:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


Buddy, I couldn't agree with you more.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 07:32 PM
link   
Pure propoganda. Troop levels will be reduced from 64,000 to 50,000. Are we to assume that only 14,000 troops in Iraq are actually "combat" troops? And since the the remaining troops will be there for training and support, I guess we will only need the most experienced troops to stay there. Senior enlisted and officers only, all the E-4 and below can go home, their services will not be needed.

Riiiiiight



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 08:43 PM
link   
These guys who are leaving Iraq will simply be part of the surge in Afganistan don't let them fool y'all these poor guys are just going to be re-assigned.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 08:43 PM
link   
These guys who are leaving Iraq will simply be part of the surge in Afganistan don't let them fool y'all these poor guys are just going to be re-assigned.




top topics



 
2

log in

join