Nbadan
11-15-2006, 02:22 PM
November 15, 2006
Get Out Now? Not So Fast, Experts Say
By MICHAEL R. GORDON
WASHINGTON, Nov. 14 — One of the most resonant arguments in the debate over Iraq holds that the United States can move forward by pulling its troops back, as part of a phased withdrawal. If American troops begin to leave and the remaining forces assume a more limited role, the argument holds, it will galvanize the Iraqi government to assume more responsibility for securing and rebuilding Iraq.
This is the case now being argued by many Democrats, most notably Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, the incoming chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, who asserts that the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq should begin within four to six months.
But this argument is being challenged by a number of military officers, experts and former generals, including some who have been among the most vehement critics of the Bush administration’s Iraq policies.
Anthony C. Zinni, the former head of the United States Central Command and one of the retired generals who called for the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, argued that any substantial reduction of American forces over the next several months would be more likely to accelerate the slide to civil war than stop it.
Ny Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/15/washington/15military.html?_r=1&th=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&emc=th&pagewanted=print&adxnnlx=1163599307-FP9bKBEeusreJThg6QgKAw)
Even if it takes a couple of years to clear everyone out, at least the message is clear to Iraq leaders, "Get your shit together cause pretty soon, we're outta here..." Who knows for sure what the response will be, but at least there will be a deadline. There is already a mock civil-war happening over there. There's nothing our troop presence is going to do to quell it now.
Get Out Now? Not So Fast, Experts Say
By MICHAEL R. GORDON
WASHINGTON, Nov. 14 — One of the most resonant arguments in the debate over Iraq holds that the United States can move forward by pulling its troops back, as part of a phased withdrawal. If American troops begin to leave and the remaining forces assume a more limited role, the argument holds, it will galvanize the Iraqi government to assume more responsibility for securing and rebuilding Iraq.
This is the case now being argued by many Democrats, most notably Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, the incoming chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, who asserts that the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq should begin within four to six months.
But this argument is being challenged by a number of military officers, experts and former generals, including some who have been among the most vehement critics of the Bush administration’s Iraq policies.
Anthony C. Zinni, the former head of the United States Central Command and one of the retired generals who called for the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, argued that any substantial reduction of American forces over the next several months would be more likely to accelerate the slide to civil war than stop it.
Ny Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/15/washington/15military.html?_r=1&th=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&emc=th&pagewanted=print&adxnnlx=1163599307-FP9bKBEeusreJThg6QgKAw)
Even if it takes a couple of years to clear everyone out, at least the message is clear to Iraq leaders, "Get your shit together cause pretty soon, we're outta here..." Who knows for sure what the response will be, but at least there will be a deadline. There is already a mock civil-war happening over there. There's nothing our troop presence is going to do to quell it now.