WAR: Rumsfeld Suggests Troop Pullout Before Peaceful Iraq

Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld has suggested that U.S. troops may leave Iraq when Iraqi Forces are trained to take over their job, even if iraq is not fully at peace. Rumsfeld added that Iraq has never been peaceful or perfect and it would be unrealistic to keep troops in Iraq waiting for a full peace. He also said that it would be up to the President Bush and and iterim Iraqi Prime Minister, Iyad Allawi.



excerpts from the full story



The comments were said Thursday, at meeting with President Bush and Mr. Allawi . Guess we'll have to wait and see what happens next.



[edit on 24-9-2004 by Banshee]

I don't see a pull out that is misleading, the only pull out is for the existing troops to be replace by new troops.

You have to read the link to see the truth.

I can not believe we have 100.000 trops in Iraq, that's a lot of money to support all those troops.

He's lying. Iraqi forces will never be trained because insurgents are throwing bombs at anyone who associates with Americans. Guess he hasn't noticed how many Iraqi policemen have been killed this past month?

That is true the insurgents are targeting any Iraqi that shows any desire to work for the interim goverment, that is so sad.

He's only suggesting it. The President will have to make the final decision. The Iraqi troops are half- trained now. I expect a mass exodus around Spring. It's just to bad that our soldiers are going to have to be there another Thaksgiving and Christmas.
God, Please Bless Our Fighting Men and Women.

.
Let me extrapolate based on current conditions:

There will never be peace in Iraq in our lifetimes.
Therefore Whenever we withdraw troops it not be peaceful.

I hope we can get it to a point it is at least semi-calm before we leave.
.

I don't see a pull out that is misleading, the only pull out is for the existing troops to be replace by new troops.

The article was suggesting that the U.S. might not need to stay in Iraq in full force until there is 100% peace. It wasn't saying that we are pulling out immediately or anytime in the near future, but was suggesting that when they get the Iraqi troops trained and able to handle it our troops can be lessened or possibly can be replaced by coalition forces.

He's lying.

Personally, I think that Rumsfeld has a much better idea of what is going on over there than we do. We have to rely on the media to get our information and only negative stuff makes news. He has top secret info and the entire inside scoop that we are not privy to.

Jemison

Personally Jemison I see US comitment in Iraq way past my life time.

.
Anyone besides me get this feeling that Bush is going to the last man standing in Iraq? Everyone else is starting to make little withdrawal noises. First they will start toeing their way then quitely walking and then everyone will be rushing for the door.

Bush will be left standing with a dumb 'deer in the headlights' look on his face.

I think we all forget that Iraq was 99% peaceful before we decided to invade their country.

Originally posted by Kriz_4
I think we all forget that Iraq was 99% peaceful before we decided to invade their country.

I agree with you, for some reason "terrorism" in Iraq started after the invasion. Sad but truth, I am glad you can see it and other see it too.

BS. If evil Rumsfeld said this, he's doing it purely as a "vote for us" campaign and he's lying thru his teeth. What they want is to expand the war into other countries. How can anyone beleive Satan?

ROFL Good one, Rummy. Tell me how are Iraq national security forces going to do the job the AMERICAN MILITARY can't do?

Wow, hard to believe: yet another American war where we won every battle but didn't win.

Well, another Vietnam again. I guess we will have a lot of movies about war in Iraq and trying to paint the defeat of America a bit different. I wonder will they use Agent Orange before they leave?

Originally posted by taibunsuu
ROFL Good one, Rummy. Tell me how are Iraq national security forces going to do the job the AMERICAN MILITARY can't do?

Wow, hard to believe: yet another American war where we won every battle but didn't win.

Why be so critical of the American military and it's leaders? Do you actually think that we are losing? Come on now. At the end of WWII, in the European Theatre, the Germans had surrendered and Allied forces occupied there country. Yet, American soldiers were still getting killed by the same type insurgents that's present in Iraq. Germany wasn't to the same extent, but still the same. The reason it's worse in Iraq is because of the number of people that have weapons. It will get better. We'll just have to give it time.

When the Iraqi Army is fully trained, which they're half way there now, I feel confident that they will do a good job in trying to stabilize the region even more. They'll have a constitution and they'll take oaths to uphold it.

Don't get me wrong. There will still be violence. That may never end, but Iraq will be free. Is America without violence of it's own? Of course not! We will have to give the people of Iraq the benefit of the doubt and go from there.

Originally posted by taibunsuu
ROFL Good one, Rummy. Tell me how are Iraq national security forces going to do the job the AMERICAN MILITARY can't do?

Wow, hard to believe: yet another American war where we won every battle but didn't win.

Hey moderators! I accidentally made a double posting! Can you delete this one. Thanks.

[edit on 25/9/04 by Intelearthling]

america has troops on every continent in the world it won't be long before it's every counrty. A little tiff here a little tiff there and when the foot is in the door and they have a say in what goes on with just a few troops left behind to keep an eye on every thing.

Originally posted by Intelearthling

Why be so critical of the American military and it's leaders? Do you actually think that we are losing? Come on now. At the end of WWII, in the European Theatre, the Germans had surrendered and Allied forces occupied there country. Yet, American soldiers were still getting killed by the same type insurgents that's present in Iraq.

Yes, mop-up operations continued and as we all know Iwo Jima's last Japanese soldier stuck around until 1954 when he was finally killed, and in the Philippines one dude stuck it out until 1974.

However, to say the situation in Germany after VE Day on May 9, 1945 is comparable to the current situation in Iraq and Rumsfeld's statements about the Iraqis doing what Americans are doing are not comparable.

What is more comparable is the process of Vietnamization, whereby the US tried to make the South's soldiers capable of defending themselves without US presence. The Iraqi national army right now is so corrupted by the rebellion that Marines joke that when they bring the troops out for training during the day, the snipers that night show considerable improvement in their marksmanship.

There is of course a chance that national elections will help the situation stabilize, but I think it's going to take a miracle.

I dont think that there is such a thing as 100% peace anywhere around the world.
I can see american troops staying in Iraq for the next 15 years. The best we can hope for is that the new Iraq army will be able to defeat the insurgents of course there is the issue of how the yanks are going to rebuild the Iraq army.
Perhaps the Iraq army should do all its trainng overseas. Even if the new Iraq army can defeat the insurgents there will still be small numbers of US troops in Iraq for border sercuity.

taibunsuu

As usual you always bring and excellent point. No even in my mind I was imagining that what you said could be true, the Iraqi army perhaps no all of them may indeed be the same insurgents that US troops are fighting.

The US is training them, arming them, feeding them and providing them with everything they need to become better fighters and for free.

Woa!!!!!!!!!Who needs terrorist camps in Iraq? They can do it the legal way, and USA approved: lol: