What the Iraq Pull Out has to do with WWIII:

Consider this. We still have troops in... Japan, Germany, South Korea, with the exception of Vietnam because we lost. So why are we pulling out of Iraq? On a military foreign policy standpoint it really does make no sense.

We remained in Japan and Germany after WW2 as part of the Occupation of those countries. The countries asked us to help out after the wars and to maintain stability. We still have troops in Berlin, but once the wall fell, many of our troops left, but there are still a handful of battalions stationed in the city. We have troops in Japan probably to maintain diplomatic relations and to keep on eye on things.

We are still in South Korea because they are always going to be a target to the North. They are our allies and good friends. We jump in when things get too hot, like the war games that were going on last year and the beginning of this year.

We lost Vietnam so obviously we couldn't stay...

The only country that we have completely pulled out of in the last 50 years is... DING DING DING!!!! Iraq.

Obama might have done a political move here, because of his profound hatred of that war, but it's a very messy situation now, (unless if this was orchestrated which I think it is) because now there are no troops there. It's unclear if we won or lost. We probably lost even though we did succeed in putting in place a different government than Saddam. I mean why not keep 1000-3000 troops there? especially if we still have troops in Germany from WWII days!!! That makes some sense.

So what's on TPTB's minds these days? WWIII of course! They need everyone home for the holidays to rekindle some joyous memories in the pawns, I mean soldiers' minds before they get shipped off to Iran in about a few months.

Can anyone else see this plot?

reply to post by jjf3rd77


Because the only troops pulled out are active combat troops, we will still maintain a healthy training force and embassy force in Iraq.

reply to post by jjf3rd77


i can kind of see where you're coming from however i think you're over simplifying things - im too drunk to engage in any real discussion now so i'll come back to this tomorrow..see what others chime in

cheers mate, stu

Whoa... Now back up a bit. Who suggested we were pulling out of Iraq?? True..today marks the end of the official military mission for Iraq, but you're talking in terms of Vietnam type pull outs, which is anything but true here. If nothing else at all, we still have an Embassy compound with thousands of Americans and others attached to or living inside it...and then all the private contract people related to ongoing efforts in Iraq in a variety of areas.

What we withdrew was the 911 those left behind could have called. It would be BETTER if the pull out were total, under the circumstances. No.. We have the worst of both worlds. Enough American presence in the long term to serve as targets..but no strength left to deter that from being exploited. What a way to lose a war.

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
reply to post by jjf3rd77

 

Because the only troops pulled out are active combat troops, we will still maintain a healthy training force and embassy force in Iraq.

Where will the active combat troops go next???

Embassy troops don't do anything!!! And there are only about 700 of them. there are more employees at the embassy.

news.antiwar.com...

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

What we withdrew was the 911 those left behind could have called. It would be BETTER if the pull out were total, under the circumstances. No.. We have the worst of both worlds. Enough American presence in the long term to serve as targets..but no strength left to deter that from being exploited.

What a way to lose a war.

Well for one Obama is acting all High and Mighty now, since he "ended" the war. And the majority of the public don't even know or care about the embassy.

I agree entirely. There should be a least one active military squadron(do they still use those?) there.

You do realize this wasn't a decision by the US. Why do so many people think this was Obama's call? The Iraqi Government said they don't want/need us there anymore and we had a time limit to GTFO.

Originally posted by FreedomXisntXFree
You do realize this wasn't a decision by the US. Why do so many people think this was Obama's call? The Iraqi Government said they don't want/need us there anymore and we had a time limit to GTFO.

edit on 31-12-2011 by FreedomXisntXFree because: (no reason given)

Well Obama sure is acting like it was his decision to make. And so is the media/General public.

We were asked to leave Iraq??? really. Please show me this as I couldn't find that info.

reply to post by jjf3rd77


SOFA pdf.
www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R40011.pdf

reply to post by LadySkadi


Apparently they didn't really ask us we just came to a mutual agreement which the Iraqi people were extremely unhappy about. So I guess that answers my other question huh. It is all orchestrated I guess.

Meh,



Iran is posturing and trying to buy time until Iraq can get it's house in order, hence why they are trying to reinstall relations together....this also has a lot to do with Syria actually....all 3 countries WILL support one another if Iran is attacked, or if Syria has a UN force that attacks.....this will not be the Libya cakewalk that America and the west is used to....And with Pakistan and Afghanistan in the mix as sympathizers it could get real interesting. The whole region has potential for wackiness.....that we really should stay away from at all levels...

AH Admiral Fish face......."ITS A TRAP"


It will be the big suck......where Israel plays into it? Not sure.......but.....if current events is any indicator we're gonna find out real fast whose been given us the finger behind our back.

Originally posted by FreedomXisntXFree
You do realize this wasn't a decision by the US. Why do so many people think this was Obama's call? The Iraqi Government said they don't want/need us there anymore and we had a time limit to GTFO.

edit on 31-12-2011 by FreedomXisntXFree because: (no reason given)

You're kidding, right? Iraq asked us to leave, so regardless of American intentions or desires, we just pack our trash and cart our gear onto planes for the ride home? Obama didn't have anything to say about it...Iraq made this all happen, is that what apparently happened here?

How is it...that approach didn't work worth a darn for Gadaffi, or Saddam himself for that matter? When the U.S. actually leaves a place simply because the locals want us to, I'll fall over in a dead faint. The shock will simply be too much to take. lol... If America wanted to stay and Iraq said leave...I believe they'd have received a little instruction on the effects of high velocity ballistics on the human body. Namely, the body of whatever Iraqi's were telling us this news we really weren't in the mood for.

Ask Karzai how all that works...He damn sure got 'the chat' last year when he was making serious rumblings about how we were starting to overstay our welcome. Yeah...didn't hear that talk for long, huh?

Bush started it...Indeed. However, Obama bought the war with the job and he owns the way it's ended....along with whatever comes after. His baby, his problem. Lets see how he handles disaster this year.

Originally posted by BooKrackers
Meh,



Iran is posturing and trying to buy time until Iraq can get it's house in order, hence why they are trying to reinstall relations together....this also has a lot to do with Syria actually....all 3 countries WILL support one another if Iran is attacked, or if Syria has a UN force that attacks.....this will not be the Libya cakewalk that America and the west is used to....And with Pakistan and Afghanistan in the mix as sympathizers it could get real interesting. The whole region has potential for wackiness.....that we really should stay away from at all levels...

AH Admiral Fish face......."ITS A TRAP"


It will be the big suck......where Israel plays into it? Not sure.......but.....if current events is any indicator we're gonna find out real fast whose been given us the finger behind our back.

Here we go again. People are already forgetting that it was France, who pushed hard to intervene in Libya. Yes, the U.S. launched the initial cruise missile strike but none the less, it was France who pushed for it. Just like how UK, Denmark, Australian, Canadian etc. forces are in Afghanistan. It's what allies do.

Ummmm 16,000 Americans remain in Iraq at the largest embassy in the WORLD. And the US has stated that their security is VERY well taken care of i.e. we still have a force there.

Next.

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
Consider this. We still have troops in... Japan, Germany, South Korea, with the exception of Vietnam because we lost. So why are we pulling out of Iraq? On a military foreign policy standpoint it really does make no sense.

We remained in Japan and Germany after WW2 as part of the Occupation of those countries. The countries asked us to help out after the wars and to maintain stability. We still have troops in Berlin, but once the wall fell, many of our troops left, but there are still a handful of battalions stationed in the city. We have troops in Japan probably to maintain diplomatic relations and to keep on eye on things.

We are still in South Korea because they are always going to be a target to the North. They are our allies and good friends. We jump in when things get too hot, like the war games that were going on last year and the beginning of this year.

We lost Vietnam so obviously we couldn't stay...

The only country that we have completely pulled out of in the last 50 years is... DING DING DING!!!! Iraq.

Obama might have done a political move here, because of his profound hatred of that war, but it's a very messy situation now, (unless if this was orchestrated which I think it is) because now there are no troops there. It's unclear if we won or lost. We probably lost even though we did succeed in putting in place a different government than Saddam. I mean why not keep 1000-3000 troops there? especially if we still have troops in Germany from WWII days!!! That makes some sense.

So what's on TPTB's minds these days? WWIII of course! They need everyone home for the holidays to rekindle some joyous memories in the pawns, I mean soldiers' minds before they get shipped off to Iran in about a few months.

Can anyone else see this plot?

reply to post by Clisen33



I have not forgotten who started the Libyan peeing for distance contest, but without US logistics it would have never lasted as long as it did. France was running low of munitions for crying out loud...the US has been and will always be NATOs kickstand propping up the force regardless of what country starts the poop fest.

And having the US in Iraq for security is meaningless. It could be a quick work around if Iran really wanted to get through Iraq to get to Syria and vice versa. That is why sanctions will not be 100% effective. As long as there is a border open, they are going to eventually get what they need.

Originally posted by princeofpeace
Ummmm 16,000 Americans remain in Iraq at the largest embassy in the WORLD. And the US has stated that their security is VERY well taken care of i.e. we still have a force there.

Next.

Um, read the other posts 700 Embassy troops are there the rest are employees not trained soldiers, and embassy troops do nothing. you call 700 people a force? wow.