February 11, 2009 4:13 PM

Gates: U.S. In Iraq For Protracted Period

(AP)  Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Sunday that U.S. troops probably would remain in Iraq for a "protracted period," but at a reduced level and with a more limited mission.

With the Senate expected to resume debate this week on anti-war legislation, Gates said he would recommend that President Bush veto a proposal by Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., that would require troops get as much time at their home station as their deployments to the war front.

He would not how large a force he envisioned in the coming years. "I don't know what the numbers would be," the Pentagon chief said in a broadcast interview.

"Assuming the conditions prevail in Iraq that allows us to continue the drawdown that the president has talked about, the idea is that we would have a much more limited role in Iraq for some protracted period of time, a stabilizing force, a force that would be a fraction of the size of what we have there now," Gates said.

In the long term, Gates said, U.S. forces would focus on border security, fighting terrorists and training and equipping Iraqi security forces.

Mr. Bush has compared America's future in Iraq to the peacekeeping role U.S. troops play in South Korea, where they have been stationed for some five decades.

"That history remains to be written," Gates said. "In part it will depend on what kind of condition we leave Iraq in."

Mr. Bush announced last week that he had approved a plan by Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, to withdraw 5,700 troops from Iraq by the holidays and reduce the force from 20 combat brigades to 15 brigades by next July.

On Friday, Gates raised the possibility of cutting troop levels to 100,000 or so by the end of next year, well beyond the cuts Mr. Bush announced.

The president has ordered Petraeus to make a further assessment and fresh recommendations in March. There are about 169,000 U.S. troops in Iraq today.

Looking ahead to the Senate's debate on Iraq policy, Gates took issue with Webb's proposal.

"It would be extremely difficult for us to manage that. It really is a backdoor way to try and force the president to accelerate the drawdown," Gates said. "Again, the drawdowns have to be based on the conditions on the ground. We have to leave Iraq in a much more stable place than it has been over the last two or three years."

If Webb's amendment were enacted, Gates said it would force him to consider again extending tours in Iraq.

"Extensions are a possibility if we were to have to comply with a law like that, that gave us no flexibility. We would have to cobble together units from various smaller units and individuals that wouldn't have trained together," Gates said.

Active-duty Army units today are on 15-month deployments with a promise of no more than 12 months rest, and Marines who spend seven or more months at war sometimes get six months or less at home.

"We're having difficulty trying to keep to my policy of 15 months deployed, 12 months at home, for the active force and a full-year mobilization limit on the Guard and Reserve. We're having enough trouble trying to make that work, without the strictures of legislation," Gates said.

Gates spoke on "This Week" on ABC.

© 2009 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Add a Comment See all 238 Comments
by tbweb September 18, 2007 5:53 AM EDT
Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Sunday that U.S. troops probably would remain in Iraq for a "protracted period," but at a reduced level and with a more limited mission.

duhhhhhhhhhhhh of course the usa will be there for a protracted time...

the usa is still in bosnia, korea, japan, germany, etc etc etc...

Posted by lars008 at 06:25 AM : Sep 17, 2007,,,

Like the age old saying goes, you touch it, you own it! That''s what the U.S. gets for sticking its fingers in Iraq and those other places!
Reply to this comment
by j4401 September 17, 2007 6:04 PM EDT
The Real Reason We''re In Iraq:
An influential group of conservatives convinced President George W. Bush that it was in America''s best interests to conquer Iraq as a first step toward dominating the oil-producing nations in the Middle East. There was no "exit plan" because we never intended to exit. The plan was, and is, to build military bases in Iraq and stay there forever. Our leaders see Iraq as a place to make money. So Bush & Co. have set up their friends to cash in on the rebuilding of Iraq.
Reply to this comment
by forthepeopl1 September 17, 2007 3:31 PM EDT
has everyone noticed that no papers front pages are saying anything about what this a/s/s hole greenspam has said now that he doesn''t have to answer to bush/cheneny.

he better watch out because all that was involve in that mess of the nukes being deplode accross the usa is and are missing or reported to have ancindent and are dead...

so cheney and bush and rove and other had them killed
Reply to this comment
by forthepeopl1 September 17, 2007 3:24 PM EDT
THE highly respected former chairman of the Federal Reserve, Alan Greenspan, launches a harshly critical attack on President George W Bush%u2019s economic competence in his memoir published tomorrow.

While his declaration that America%u2019s prime motive for the Iraq war was oil will set off one political storm, his onslaught against Republican fiscal mismanagement will cause another, just as the economy becomes a big issue in the primary election campaign.

Greenspan%u2019s 531-page book will do little to restore faith in the Bush administration%u2019s claims of economic proficiency at a time when the markets are deeply unsettled. He has harsh words for Bush, the vice-president, *** Cheney, and the Republicans over their big spending and lack of financial discipline. They are contrasted with former president Bill Clinton, whom Greenspan clearly admires.

He writes that Bush%u2019s failure to curb spending was %u201Ca major mistake%u201D and that Republican congressmen were %u201Cfeeding at the trough%u201D. %u201CThe Republicans in Congress lost their way,%u201D he says. %u201CThey swapped principle for power. They ended up with neither. They deserved to lose [the 2006 congressional election].%u201D

it''s time to hang bush/cheney out to dry...come on america are you going to let these bugs put us in war again with iran. than declair himself as king
Reply to this comment
by lars008-2009 September 17, 2007 12:23 PM EDT
VOTE FOR JEFFERSON%u2026 VOTE GOP%u2026

dnc are like john adams and want to give the jihadist their lunch money hoping they will leave us alone....

gop are like thomas jefferson and want to spend their lunch money on weapons and go kick the jihadists in their arses.....

What Thomas Jefferson learned from the Muslim book of jihad

Thomas Jefferson knew about fascist nazi islam..... he killed plenty of them....

In 1786 Jefferson and John Adams went to negotiate with Tripoli''s envoy to London, Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman or (Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja). They asked him by what right he extorted money and took slaves. Jefferson reported to Secretary of State John Jay, and to the Congress:

The ambassador answered us that [the right] was founded on the Laws of the Prophet (Mohammed), that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have answered their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to heaven.[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Barbary_War
http://www.usvetdsp.com/jan07/jeff_quran.htm
muslim justifies slavery and piracy%u2026
http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?6bdec278-6a71-4436-bc4d-29d1c54b0ad7
MUSLIM PIRATES STRIKE AGAIN
http://astuteblogger.blogspot.com/2005/06/muslim-pirates-strike-again.html
Reply to this comment
by lars008-2009 September 17, 2007 10:46 AM EDT
Posted by ramos937 at 06:46 AM : Sep 17, 2007

hahahahaha

as if senile greenspan would know... lol

hahahahaha
Reply to this comment
by ramos937 September 17, 2007 9:46 AM EDT
After Greenspan''s admission that we went to war with Iraq over oil, there should be enough GOP votes to overcome Bush''s veto. If not, then the GOP is doomed as a national party.
Reply to this comment
by lars008-2009 September 17, 2007 9:32 AM EDT
Posted by grazinggoat at 01:01 AM : Sep 17, 2007

hahahaha

i guess that explains this...

And Iraq''s big oil contracts go to ...

Companies from China, India and other Asian nations are seen getting the first contracts. But don''t write off Big Oil just yet.
http://money.cnn.com/2007/04/05/news/international/iraq_oil/index.htm
Reply to this comment
by lars008-2009 September 17, 2007 9:25 AM EDT
Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Sunday that U.S. troops probably would remain in Iraq for a "protracted period," but at a reduced level and with a more limited mission.

duhhhhhhhhhhhh of course the usa will be there for a protracted time...

the usa is still in bosnia, korea, japan, germany, etc etc etc...

it is a given the usa will be in iraq and afghanistan for a long long long time...

just like the 3rd world war of the communists against the non communists...

it is a given the non muslim world will be fighting fascist nazi terrorislam for a long long long time... in this 4th world war...

World War IV: The Long Struggle Against Islamofascism
http://www.**********/World-War-IV-Struggle-Islamofascism/dp/0385522215/ref=pd_ts_b_4/104-3631381-4433551?ie=UTF8&s=books
Reply to this comment
by iceman_1960 September 17, 2007 9:24 AM EDT
Is screen_name_ still around ?

He''s s*crewing all other posters: Right, Middle, Left.

If this level of Internet vandalism bugs you, flood CBS with complaints.

"+report abuse" under his screen_name_

"Contact Us" at the bottom of the screen.

Call CBS (212-975-7000)

Write to CBS:
51 West 52nd Street
New York, NY 10019

What screen_name_ is doing is a felony.

Help send him to jail.
Reply to this comment
See all 238 Comments
.
Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook