WASHINGTON, July 18, 2008
"General Time Horizon" Eyed For Troop Cuts
U.S. And Iraq Say Timeline For More U.S. Troop Withdrawals Is Part Of Broader Security Pact
-
U.S. Army Sgt. John Orem, right, and Staff Sgt. Eric Atkinson, left, from 4th Squadron, 2nd Stryker Cavalry Regiment search a home in Sa'ada, about 20 miles north of Baghdad in Iraq's volatile Diyala province, July 7, 2008. (AP Photo/Maya Alleruzzo)
-
Photo Essay Week In Iraq Photos A daily diary with scenes of the latest attacks and snapshots from the effort to rebuild a nation.
Iraqi officials, in a sign of growing confidence as violence decreases, have been pressuring the United States to agree to a specific timeline to withdraw U.S. forces. President Bush has adamantly opposed a timeline, and the White House said Friday that the timeframe being discussed would not be "an arbitrary date for withdrawal."
Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki talked about the timing issue as part of discussions over a broader security agreement to keep American troops in Iraq after a U.N. mandate expires on Dec. 31.
The White House says the two leaders, in a conversation on Thursday, agreed that the accord should include "a general time horizon for meeting aspirational goals, such as the resumption of Iraqi security control in their cities and provinces and the further reduction of U.S. combat forces from Iraq."
Iraq has proposed requiring U.S. forces to fully withdraw five years after the Iraqis take the lead on security nationwide - though that precondition could take years to meet.
Earlier this month, Iraq's national security adviser, Mouwaffak al-Rubaie, said Baghdad would not accept any security deal unless it contains specific dates for the withdrawal of U.S.-led forces. Al-Maliki also has said he expects the pending troop deal with the United States to have some type of timetable for withdrawal.
Bush has vetoed legislation approved by the Democratic Congress setting deadlines for American troop cutbacks.
The White House statement said the timing of further reductions would be linked to improved security conditions. In recently weeks, Iraq's government has expressed increasing confidence about its authority and the country's improved stability.
The United States has handed control of nine of 18 provinces to Iraqi officials.
The U.S. military buildup in Iraq that began more than 18 months ago has ended. In recent days, the 3rd Infantry Division's 2nd Brigade, the last of the five additional combat brigades sent in by Bush last year, left the country. There are still 150,000 U.S. troops in Iraq - as many as 15,000 more than before the buildup began.
Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said on Wednesday that he is likely to recommend further troops reductions this fall because security has improved.
"I won't go so far as to say that progress in Iraq from a military perspective has reached a tipping point or is irreversible
it has not, and it is not," Mullen said. "But security is unquestionably and remarkably better. Indeed, if these trends continue I expect to be able early this fall to recommend to the secretary and the president further troop reductions."
Defense Secretary Robert Gates said officials are looking for ways to send additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan this year. A cutback in Iraq could clear the way for more troops to go to Afghanistan.
The White House statement said the reduction in U.S. forces in Iraq was "a testament to the improving capacity of Iraq's Security Forces and the success of joint operations that were initiated under the new strategy put in place by the president and the prime minister in January 2007."
In other developments:
© MMVIII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie."
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
... - 9
- next
See all 172 CommentsIf it weren''t so pathetic, it would be funny!
Talk to enemy leaders? we would never do that! We aren''t talking to Iran... I mean.. umm... we''re just gonna... sit there. Yeah, we''re not going to talk, we''re just going to sit there.
I give credit to Bush for realizing that the situation is dire, and the country could not wait until Janauary to implement Obama''s approach to these issues. Of course, he is still too stubborn and too much of a liar to admit what he is doing, and give credit where credit is due.
This so-called administration''s failure to take a hike is "not helpful"; in fact, it''s downright "troubling."
Problem is...the surge was designed for political progress which did not happen. Back to the old drawing board for the cons!
Posted by jh6379
------------------------
Not only did it happen, it is happening right now as we speak. Don''''t you read? Or do you just continuously spout out your outdated Democrat talking points?
Posted by ddhinnyc at 03:14 PM : Jul 18, 2008
Petraeus is paying the Sunnis to not attack our troops. Typical Republican solution to throw money at a problem...
Wait until the pay checks stop...
Instead of liberals trying to re-write history, history is writing the liberal''s epitaph.
Posted by OneAmerican- at 08:31 PM : Jul 18, 2008
Bull
They do not deserve to keep the wealth they have hoarded. They are just idiot suckers waiting to be fleeced. You do society a huge favor by relieving the morons of their money. They neither deserve it nor know what to do with it.
Posted by IT_Oldtimer
I don''t even go to church, but anyone that would make that statement is a moron.
Posted by vietnam21
It''s no problem feeling intellectually superior to the Bush/Cheney gang and their semi-literate supporters
They do not deserve to keep the wealth they have hoarded. They are just idiot suckers waiting to be fleeced. You do society a huge favor by relieving the morons of their money. They neither deserve it nor know what to do with it.
They say that "a fool and his money are soon parted", but the "Christians" are the easiest to scam of all! They will "believe" literally ANYTHING! A child could con them out oft heir life''s savings - easily!
Harvest the morons - get rich quick!
Posted by hungry1968
--------------------------
It''s not at all hard to understand this, you just gotta understand the neocon, conservative mindset.
If the evidence you have isn''t telling you what you want to hear, then just throw it away....get different evidence....and don''t give up until you get the evidence that tells you want to hear....It''s really quite simple..
And when you''re as rich as most neocon conservatives are you can buy a lot of evidence.
You can even buy evidence that says global warming is a bunch of hooeey.
It''s all just a matter of gettin'' the evidence you want to hear.
That''s how Cheney did with the pre-invation intelligence...
What''s really at stake here is how Bush agrees to the timetable but convinces his supporters that he hasn''t flip-flopped---which, he has!
But, for Bush supporters who are smart enough to recognize the ''slight of hand'' occurring, it will be a ''bitter pill'' to accept that the ''cowboy from Crawford'' is flip-flopping from ''big stick'' mode into normal negotiate mode!
They think they are geniuses, but they are really morons just waiting to be conned. Appeal to their greed, and own them totally - then bankrupt them totally.
They are so easy to con, because they are so dumb and greedy.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
... - 9
- next
See all 172 Comments