US to pull out of Iraq

[Jim Craik]

I just heard on the news that President Obama has anounce that all US troups will be pulled from Iraq by the end of the year.

That is great news, hopefull can put this un-needed war behind us for good!

Thank you President Obama!

[Rich A]

They are going to move a majority of them to Afghanistan not all of them are coming home.

[Randy V]

Funny...

I could have sworn I heard that very same thing back in 2008....

Maybe it's like Deja vu all over again....

[Al Wohlstrom]

Ahmadinejad is waiting by the back door.

[Mr. Fechter]

Let us hope that this will not be another Vietnam moment.

[Chris P.]

Originally Posted by lonesomebob

Let us hope that this will not be another Vietnam moment.

Too late Bob - we were saying that back before we actually went in...

[Mr. Fechter]

Originally Posted by aero

Too late Bob - we were saying that back before we actually went in...

What's done is done. I just hope someone is looking in the rearview mirror when the withdrawal commences.

[Al Wohlstrom]

I'm surprised that we are not maintaining a "presence" as we always have done. I realize that we have tons of excess money, but I'm amazed we are not getting reparation, Iraq is not a poor country.

[40 Bud]

We will get nothing back from Iraq and will probably leave millions of dollars worth of equipment behind.

[Pete McCluskey.]

IMHO everyone should also get out of Afghanistan as well. A total waste being there.

[domtoni]

- Don't forget all that the Iraqi parliament voted us out in December 2008.
- The US will maintain a presence of advisors, trainers etc. Heard this over the weekend.

[Ian K]

Originally Posted by domtoni

- Don't forget all that the Iraqi parliament voted us out in December 2008.
- The US will maintain a presence of advisors, trainers etc. Heard this over the weekend.

Also, Iraq would not guarantee that US troops would be protected from legal persecution after Dec 2011. While I am not advocating soldiers be protected from doing bad things, I also don't want soldiers being charged for war crimes if they were following orders. It is a tenuous situation, and by withdrawing troops, it is avoided.

Ian

[Jim Craik]

Ian,

I'm also hearing that this legal issue has a very big part in the pull out.

[Ian K]

I am pretty sure it was the main reason.

Ian

[domtoni]

Originally Posted by iank2112

Also, Iraq would not guarantee that US troops would be protected from legal persecution after Dec 2011. While I am not advocating soldiers be protected from doing bad things, I also don't want soldiers being charged for war crimes if they were following orders. It is a tenuous situation, and by withdrawing troops, it is avoided.

Ian

Orders are one thing, the application of those orders a second issue and those judging in a war crimes tribunal may be the questionable characters.

[Ian K]

Originally Posted by domtoni

Orders are one thing, the application of those orders a second issue and those judging in a war crimes tribunal may be the questionable characters.

Yep - which is why not being able to guarantee immunity from prosecution was a major factor in the decision.

Again, war crimes are war crimes, and justice should be served in those cases (though not necessarily where the crimes were committed since the guarantee of a fair trial and sentencing is nearly impossible). But also, the petty crimes which may have stiffer punishments as well as the lack of guarantee of fair investigations, trials and sentencing. All taken into one lump sum, it is a no brainer to pull troops out and avoid the problem altogether from all angles - no troops, no incidents.

Ian

[Doug Sainlar]

Just one more of Obamma's promises that has been kept, Jim. What I heard was about 200 troops would be remaining as security for the embassy grounds...deployments at other hot spots seem to be in the same range.

Originally Posted by Pete

IMHO everyone should also get out of Afghanistan as well. A total waste being there.

Absolutely, Pete !! Bring 'em all home ....what a novel concept, eh?
If any of them still want combat duty we have a rather rough border with Mexico and I'm sure there would be enough action for the grunts between all the snipers and the drug smugglers. Might be outgunned, I don't know, but that's never kept American soldiers from kicking some ARSE!!

Really, though, Pete, you're right, there's no winning in the middle east. They've all been fueding with each other for the past two millenium, no reason to believe that a 10 year interruption by some bully across the sea would be anything more than a temporary hindrance. They'll be back at it, no matter how much Hillary Clinton warns Iran to leave 'em alone!

Cheers!

Doug

[Terry Oxandale]

Originally Posted by Al Wohlstrom

Ahmadinejad is waiting by the back door.

This is the predator biding their time. No more balance.

[Palerider]

Originally Posted by Pete

IMHO everyone should also get out of Afghanistan as well. A total waste being there.

Should have let Japan have Australia as well -mate

[Pat]

Originally Posted by iank2112

Yep - which is why not being able to guarantee immunity from prosecution was a major factor in the decision.

Ian

Status of Forces Agreements (SOFA) are not "immunity from prosecution" or freedom to commit war crimes.
Do you object to the SOFA the UK has for its soldiers stationed in the United States? The United States and the UK are currently party to more than 100 agreements considered SOFAs.
A SOFA establishes the rights and privileges of U.S. personnel present in a country in support of the larger security arrangement. The pacts govern everything from the duration of troop bases, to the handling of estate matters of deceased personnel. The proposal in Iraq for example would provide basic rights such as criminal charges for holding prisoners over 24 hours, and requires a warrant for searches of homes and buildings that are not related to combat. U.S. contractors working for U.S. forces will be subject to Iraqi criminal law, while contractors working for the State Department and other U.S. agencies may retain their SOFA rights. If U.S. forces commit (still undecided) "major premeditated felonies" while off-duty and off-base, they will be subject to procedures that would be laid out by a joint U.S.-Iraq committee if the U.S. certifies the forces were off-duty.
Would you support a soldier held indefinitely on an accusation that he looked at an Arab woman? Without a SOFA, that's what you can get.
For example, there CURRENTLY is a status of forces agreement for the legal status of Americans (and other NATO Forces) stationed in Britain, Germany, Japan, Korea, and Afghanistan, governed by special international agreements including the NATO Status of Forces Agreement.

The SOFA discussion is a sideshow. The reality behind this is that the Maliki government (with its heavy Iranian - Muqtada Al-Sadr influence) wants the US combat power out of the region. They want the US training, equipment, money and the bases but not a material military threat to Iran. US combat leaders know they can't defend a force of several thousand trainers and logisticians without at least a brigade combat team and that size of a force is intolerable to the Iranians and therefore Al-Sadr and their proxies in the Maliki government.

This unilateral withdrawal is now an open door to the Iranians to dominate the region, a return to the Iraqi sectarian civil war and the Turks to settle a score with the Kurds and the NATO/US to lose a stabilizing presence in the most volatile region in the world.

But most troubling to me is that Muqtada Al-Sadr’s Day Brigade is now free to resume civil war and one has to hope it doesn’t parallel to historical atrocities such as Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge.