Top General To Ask For Pause In Drawdown
Official Says Petraeus Wants "Period Of Assessment" To Study Effects Of Troop Cuts
-
Photo
Gen. David Petraeus, the top commander for U.S. troops in Iraq, appears at a graduation ceremony for 700 Iraqi National Police cadets in Baghdad, Iraq, on Dec. 18, 2007. (AP Photo/Khalid Mohammed)
-
Photo Essay
Scrutinizing The Surge
Commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, U.S. ambassador testify before Congress.
Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker are due to return to Washington from Baghdad in April to report to Congress on how the war-fighting strategy is working and how to proceed on troop-level decisions. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to more freely describe administration thinking, said their testimony would come April 8-9.
Petraeus has talked in recent weeks about favoring a "period of assessment" after the currently planned troop withdrawals conclude in mid-July. He has said a pause seems necessary to give a clearer indication of the impact of those troop cuts - on the insurgency and other local conditions - before recommending any more.
The official, who briefed reporters at the White House, said Petraeus will recommend in his April report that the pause last for "four to six weeks-ish." That would mean a new assessment of troop levels wouldn't come until mid-August or even sometime in September.
A suspension is based on the notion that continuing reductions beyond July at the currently planned pace could lead to an erosion in the still-fragile security gains made over the last several months.
Despite that, the official said that "this is not a stall tactic" meant to delay or end hopes of bringing more troops home from Iraq. "I fully expect there to be more reductions this year - and so does the president," the official said.
The official was careful to note, however, that reductions might only be announced in 2008, with many or all of them possibly not leaving Iraq until later.
Also, the pause would be Bush's decision to make - not Petraeus'.
Petraeus' recommendation is only one piece of the puzzle the president will consider in April. Though he has always said that the advice of the commanders in the field is the driving force behind his decisions, Bush takes into account the views of others, such as the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who are responsible for maintaining the health of the entire armed forces, and regional commanders, who must weigh the need for forces in other parts of the world.
Bush will participate in about two weeks of briefings from all involved before Petraeus and Crocker testify on Capitol Hill, the official said.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said recently that he also favors a suspension in the drawdown, after hoping earlier that the second half of the year could take the U.S. presence in Iraq to around 10 brigades.
On Thursday, Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said it was unclear how long the president might choose to wait after July before resuming troop reductions.
"We don't know how long the pause is going to" last, Mullen told reporters at the Pentagon. He noted that when Gates endorsed the concept of a pause on Feb. 11 he said he hoped it would be brief.
Mullen has emphasized that the question of when to resume troop reductions, after July, is closely related to the Pentagon's efforts to strike a balance between maintaining momentum in Iraq and providing relief for troops and their families.
Mullen has declined to say publicly whether he favors even a brief suspension of troop reductions after July. Led by Mullen, the Joint Chiefs of Staff are studying the issue of troop levels in Iraq while taking into account other global commitments of the U.S. military, including the war in Afghanistan.
There currently are about 158,000 U.S. troops in Iraq. Last January, on Bush's order, the military began sending an additional five Army brigades to Iraq to help implement a new approach to countering the insurgency.
The last of the five extra brigades arrived in June, raising the total number of brigades in Iraq to 20. In line with a plan recommended by Petraeus and approved by Bush last September, the number of brigades fell to 19 in December and is scheduled to drop to 18 in March. It would reach 15 by July, representing a troop total of about 140,000.
© MMVIII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.



- 1
- 2
- next
See all 63 CommentsSo isn''t this how this whole thing goes down - Bush as Petraeus'' boss asks him whether it''d be better for Petraeus who''s been given the task of maintaining security in Iraq would rather have more troops or less. He''s not to consider the idea of whether it''d be better for troops to have more humane rotations, he''s not to consider the idea of whether our national security would be better served by going after Bin Laden in Pakistan, he''s only to consider the troop numbers with respect to the task he''s been assigned by his boss.
Do we (will we) actually know what factors go into Petraeus'' assessment?
Bush''s plan to topple Suddam Hussein was naive in every respect. He grossly underestimated the difficulty in doing so. What was the initial estimate for the war? $50-60 billion. They thought they''d be out of there within a year.
WRONG
He wants a massive BIG WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT solution to the problems in Iraqi society.
LBJ"s "Great Society" is nothing compared to John McCain"s "Great Iraqi Society."
He hasn"t got around to explaining how he is going to pay for it.
He"ll do that after he"s elected.
In other words, he"ll never do it.
Great strategy!
If you can''t fight ''em, buy ''em. With taxpayers dollars of course.
And they tell us the "Surge" is working!
Of course it is!
It''s Bush''s spending "Splurge," with American taxpayers money.
Meanwhile back in the US of A.
Gas at $4 a gallon.
Homeowners losing their homes.
Poor kids have no health insurance.
And the folks in Katrina are still living in the streets.
This Bush white house has its priorities right!
Look after these islamist hoodlums!
And forget those poor losers in New Orleans!
to the Choking Game. I believe he''d love it.
Bottom line, the surge is a failure. It did not bring about the stability desired, and that''s why the troops are still there, and will be there a long time. Call it what it really is, and escalation. Think Vietnam.
Posted by incog-nito at 02:21 AM
I wouldn''t call it an escalation either. It''s more like being bogged down and holding steady with no end in sight.
One of the main reasons for the decrease in violence is not the ''surge'' but the construction of fences and barriers to separate the Sunnis and the Shias in volatile areas of Iraq.
No relief is in sight until there is a political solution, and we know from the news reports that there is minimal progress in that direction.
Well. Not surprised. This was the view from the top all along. I feel for the soldiers and their families who are being asked to extend tours, double back, and sacrifice again without commesurate compensation. Politicians do not seem willing to face up to the responsibility to make the harder decisions to help them (like really consider a draft, or provide extra pay or benefits relative to sacrifice).
This situation isn''t going to change soon (but maybe before 100 years!)
** ** ** **
Bush / Cheney / McCain: Sit On It & Spin!
We Are The Deciders! We Will Do As We Please!
** ** ** **
Result: MORE troops in Iraq. MORE money spent.
====================
Democracy? Constitutional Goverbnment?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by glossypan at 08:20 AM : Mar 01, 2008
Kill al-quida and security for America.
So, the way works is we do things for a year, year and a half, and then we stop and evaluate?
We''''re surrounded by marching morons and this General is their leader.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by Nancy_Naive at 05:31 AM : Mar 01, 2008
Moron.org and George Soros have a very dangerous view of America''s future. Socialism and weak national defense are their goals. One world order.
As for this moron.org poster calling our ranking general in Iraq a traitor just shows America what useless pieces of shiite LIBS really are.
We borrow that money from China and the Muslim OPEC nations.
Not only has it destroyed our economy, owing hundreds of billions of dollars to the Chinese and Saudis is a threat to our national security.
John Mccain = Four More Years of
Eternal War - Borrow & Spend
Same thing happens in business when reorganizing.
They''''d be taking a country? Last time I checked, Iraq has a Shi''''ite majority. McCain thinks the Shi''''ites--the Mahdi Army, the Badr Corps (and yes, the Iranians)--would allow a small group of Sunni extremists to take over? In fact, as noted above, the vast majority of indigenous Iraqi Sunnis aren''''t too thrilled about the AQI presence in their country, either. (The usual caveats apply: AQI is barbaric, dastardly and intent on violating the Qu''''ran by engaging in the annihilation of innocents. We can''''t get rid of them fast enough.)
The sadness here is that McCain knows better. He knows the complexities of the world, and the region. But I suspect he''''s overplaying his Iraq hand in order to win favor with the wingnuts in his party. That is extremely unfortunate: As McCain should know better than anyone, it is extremely dishonorable for politicians to play bloody-shirt games when the nation is at war.
Posted by Joe Klein, TIME.com
John McCain continues to fight a different war in Iraq than...the U.S. military. It is a simple war of good v. evil, us v. Al Qaeda. There are aspects of truth to what he says--we''ve had good success this past year in the fight against the local branch of Al Qaeda, which the military calls Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI). But we''ve had that success mostly because Iraq''s Sunni population turned on the terrorists and sent them packing.
Which brings us to today''s edition. The political news was: McCain takes a roundhouse swing at Obama; Obama counterpunches elegantly. But what caught my Iraq-obsessed eye was this statement from McCain:
"And my friends, if we left, they (al-Qaida) wouldn''t be establishing a base," McCain said Wednesday. "They''d be taking a country, and I''m not going to allow that to happen, my friends. I will not surrender. I will not surrender to al-Qaida."
(cont)
Afghanistan mission close to failing - US
Injection of troops and aid has not brought stability says intelligence chief
After six years of US-led military support and billions of pounds in aid, security in Afghanistan is "deteriorating" and President Hamid Karzai''s government controls less than a third of the country, America''s top intelligence official has admitted.
Mike McConnell testified in Washington that Karzai controls about 30% of Afghanistan and the Taliban 10%, and the remainder is under tribal control.
The Afghan government angrily denied the US director of national intelligence''s assessment yesterday, insisting it controlled "over 360" of the country''s 365 districts. "This is far from the facts and we completely deny it," said the defence ministry.
But the gloomy comments echoed even more strongly worded recent reports by thinktanks, including one headed by the former Nato commander General James Jones, which concluded that "urgent changes" were required now to "prevent Afghanistan becoming a failed state".
jwind11 must be talking about all the information bush and his pet generals had before 9/11, or maybe it was before the iraq invasion, or maybe during the search for WMD, lap dogs and ideoloques like jwind11
they are what is wrong with amerika
If you can''t beat ''em, buy ''em!
He''s handing out free cash (American taxpayers money) to sunni warlords and islamist hoodlums to buy the peace.
And you think the republicans don''t believe in welfare?
And they tell us the "surge" is working!
Of course it is, who doesn''t want free cash!
Drop the sound bites. Reach deeper for truth.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by joyous88 at 11:17 AM : Mar 01, 2008
Surrender to al-quaida. Vote LIB.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by jwind11 at 09:24 AM : Mar 01, 2008
Then don''t you think it would behove them to share it, if they want our support? Keeping it secret and telling us that we just need to follow their little plan doesn''t work. If they''ve really got something good, bring it out!
When you see people getting killing 25, 35, 50, 70 at the time resulting in 300 or 400 people dying every week over there, show me what''s working. We have 158,000 soldiers running around with the most sophisticated weaponery in the world in a little **** ant country not much bigger than Texas and yet 200, 300, 400 people a week are still dying, as well as our young soldiers. One terrorist suicide bomb comes in and kills 70 people. We send out a whole troop with air and tank support, and get maybe one or two or three actual terrorists, and some citizens.
Now tell me who is the most effective killer?
Military occupation of this country is NOT working!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by RowdyTexan2 at 11:41 AM : Mar 01, 2008
Violence down 60% across Iraq and political reconciliation happening. Your politics have made YOU the enemy of America.
Well said!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by mbcsmith at 11:46 AM : Mar 01, 2008
Says who? When that many people are still dying every week?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by afmca at 11:49 AM : Mar 01, 2008
Exactly!
Says who? When that many people are still dying every week?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by RowdyTexan2 at 11:49 AM : Mar 01, 2008
HUH? 60% are dying every week? Please provide your source for that information.
The "conservatives" what a joke, are killing and maiming the uneducated idiot class of america that make up our military. It is no accident since they will oppose Bush''s new world order. (The world being run from Israel)
When you fight a Zionazi war of genocide for your worst enemy here in the US, you deserve to be killed. You can''t fix stupid without a bullet and the Zionazis would be powerless without these violent little nazis.
Viet Nam didn''t end until the people turned on the troops and the troops had to ask themselves the question "what are we fighting for?"
Remove your stupid support the troops magnets idiots. You are fighting for your worst enemy.
Al Cada was a Houston CIA op involved in drug smuggling and a Bush friend and partner.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by tulcak at 11:51 AM : Mar 01, 2008
LIBS just don''t get it. The U.S. military has made great progress and the LIBS just can''t stand it. What''s good for America is bad for LIBS politically, so they just keep rooting against our soldiers and HOPE FOR THE WORST.
Military Fatalities: By Time Period
Period US UK Other* Total Avg Days
6 887 44 9 940 2.39 394
5 933 32 20 985 2.39 412
4 715 13 18 746 2.35 318
3 580 25 27 632 2.93 216
2 718 27 59 804 1.9 424
1 140 33 173 4.02 43
Total 3973 174 133 4280 2.37 1807
To View Period Details Click The Period Number
Time Periods Defined
U.S. Deaths Confirmed By The DoD: 3972
Reported U.S. Deaths Pending DoD Confirmation: 1
Total 3973
DoD Confirmation List
Latest Coalition Fatality: Feb 25, 2008
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by mbcsmith at 11:46 AM : Mar 01, 2008
No Sir. You are in fact an enemy of this country if you will buy into the lies the Neocons are telling you!
The Bush family still manages the Bin Laden fortune through the Carlyle Group (SBIF - Saudi Bin Laden Investment Fund)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by mbcsmith at 11:55 AM : Mar 01, 2008
Screw politics, Sir! We''re talking about people''s lives! Have you absolutely no care that people are dying for a bunch of corrupt and idiotic ideology?
----------------------------------
----------------------------------------
------
Posted by tulcak at 11:51 AM : Mar 01, 2008
Yes, Sir!
Posted by mbcsmith at 11:55 AM : Mar 01, 2008
================================================
A trillion dollar war based on lies and fabricated evidence is progress?
Can''t bring the troops home or even draw the numbers down to invasion level is progress?
5000 dead and 1.1 million dead Iraqis is progress?
You are a moron and paid propaganda shill that sits here working for the Israeli mossad everyday. O.K., you can switch to your next user name now creep. Such as hillory08, notblue, etc.
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 63 Comments