August 2, 2010 1:30 PM

Iraq Withdrawal: What are Non-Combat Troops?

By
Brian Montopoli
Topics
Foreign Policy

President Barack Obama speaks about Iraq and Afghanistan , Monday, Aug. 2, 2010, at the Disabled American Veterans national convention in Atlanta.

(Credit: AP)

President Obama today stressed that America's plans for withdrawal from Iraq are on schedule. U.S. combat troops, he said, will be out of the country by the end of August, leaving about 50,000 "non-combat" troops who will leave by the end of 2011.

"Our commitment in Iraq is changing," he said, "from a military effort led by our troops to a civilian effort led by our diplomats."

The implication is clear: The war - the combat phase of America's involvement in Iraq - is ending. Now all that's left is a civilian-led effort in which there will be no American combat presence.

But it's worth thinking a little bit more about what the role of American forces in Iraq will really be once our combat troops have left.

Last year, I asked Defense Secretary Robert Gates to explain the difference between combat troops and "non-combat" troops. The "non-combat" troops, I noted, will still be capable of engaging the enemy.  Gates insisted there would be a significant difference between the activities of combat and non-combat troops.

"All of the combat units will be out of Iraq by the end of August [2010] and those that are left will have a combat capability," he said. "There will be, as the president said, targeted counterterrorism operations. There will be continued embeds with some of the Iraqi forces in a training capacity and so on."

He continued: "So there will be the capability, but the units will be gone, and, more importantly, the mission will have changed. And so the notion of being engaged in combat in the way we have been up until now will be completely different."

So while the troops will be "non-combat," they will still be engaged in "targeted counterterrorism operations" and working and fighting alongside Iraqi forces, according to Gates.

The military and administration's parsing of combat and non-combat troops strikes many as amounting to a distinction without a difference. In February of last year, Washington Post Pentagon reporter Thomas Ricks stated flatly on CBSNews.com's "Washington Unplugged" that "There is no such thing as non-combat troops."

Meanwhile, violence and instability in Iraq is raising questions about to what degree American forces can really fade into the background without a negative impact on the country's security situation. In just the latest instance of the near-daily violence in the country, eight people were killed Monday in a pair of bombings and a drive-by shooting.


Add a Comment
by dakotanc56 August 26, 2010 2:19 PM EDT
I am not sure why people think that we are pulling out of Iraq. Facts show that we are still in Japan, Germany, Italy (all former enemies), Korea and the Balkans. The Paris Peace Accords (for the Vietnam war) was signed in Jan 1973. Our troop were still dying in Vietnam until the evacuation from Saigon in April 1975. We have troops stationed all over the globe, many in dangerous "Hot Zones" .
In my opinion, the announcements of the withdrawal of combat troops from Iraq is a vague camouflage effort to justify troops staying in theater. It seems to be an attempt of the liberal leaning media and administration demonstrating their resolve to end a war as promised. All military personnel including observers, trainers and support people are combat troops. All are trained as fighters first ... our troops will be in the middle east for a very, very long time and they will still be sacrificed in service of our country's foreign policies.
Reply to this comment
by petie3 August 3, 2010 10:47 PM EDT
If you are not in an assault unit you are 'non-combat.' IMHO if you are within range and a purple heart you are potentially 'combat.' I got to RVN the week before TET68 and personally got shot at during the offensive. (No Purple Heart, thank God). The Marines have it right, cooks qualify and if necessary, shoot.
Reply to this comment
by dadirt August 3, 2010 9:02 AM EDT
Smoke and mirrors is all this guy has. He has to appease his left, and at teh same time make it look like he is doing good for the country. Cannot have it both ways. Attacks are up in Iraq. I hope al our sacrifices are not all for nothing! limited wars do not work!
Reply to this comment
by citizenusa-2009 August 3, 2010 8:56 AM EDT
I posted two comments yesterday. Both supporting the decision of our President. Both were removed by CBS. What's going on here?
Reply to this comment
by RealWorldNow August 3, 2010 9:30 AM EDT
I guess you comments have to make sense in order to make the cut.
by skepticalJM August 2, 2010 10:02 PM EDT
I can't believe how much I once trusted this president! He has turned out to be a flim-flam artist extraordinary. He really is nothing but an Illinois sharpie who knows how to say all the right things while he fleeces you. He has played the race card to the hilt; I just hope Americans are beginning to see through this facade!
Reply to this comment
by RealWorldNow August 3, 2010 9:31 AM EDT
Nov. 4th!
by Christina_3 August 6, 2010 4:56 PM EDT
I never trusted him...too much charisma, or, as you say, "knows how to say all the right things". Because he is our President, I will respect him,& hope that I have been wrong. But I also look to November.

I don't know about about a national opinion of President Obama today, but by Sept.,2009, according to this article:

http://article.nationalreview.com/407068/dr-barack-and-mr-obama/victor-davis-hanson,

at least some Americans had begun to see him differently.
by usaguy2010 August 2, 2010 2:31 PM EDT
This is all smoke and mirrors.. Non combative troops.. Are you kidding...Hopefully come November we will all have learned a valuable lesson...
Reply to this comment
.

Follow Political Hotsheet

Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook