From the Daily Mail (just announced on CSPAN) US to withdraw from Iraq

[Samantha]

The US and UK have secret plans to pull out of Iraq in 3 to 6 months. Bush, under increasing pressure to withdraw the troops and increasingly unpopular because of the war, is negotiating to withdraw a substantial amount of troops in 3 months, following up with another major withdrawal in 6 months. This is at odds with his public statement not to set a timetable for withdrawal.

I'll check to see if I can find a link -- it was just announced on CPAN.

This is too good to be true.

[checks-n-balances]

1. Even if it's true, it IS too good to be true...

The other shoe will drop when we invade & occupy somewhere else (Iran or Syria?).

[Samantha]

11. I am pretty sure they sent in covert people to Iran

once Iraq was invaded. I read in the Washington Post (no link now) that one of the side benefits of invading Iraq would be its close proxity to Iraq. The US could slip in and encourgage the insurgents already active in that country.

I am hoping a whole scale war can be launched inasmuch as we do not have the resources to do this.

Perhaps Bush* will have NO OTHER CHOICE than to learn some eleventh hour diplomacy. A little late, yes, but better late than never. He still has a couple more years to blow up other parts of the world.

I think he timed this to avoid hurting Republicans up for re-election in 2006; I don't really think he's too concerned with saving lives or money.

[Eloriel]

30. There's absolutely nothing that would make him learn diplomacy --

not now, not ever. He has no conscience, he doesn't listen to anyone but yes-men and women, he doesn't give a damn what anyone says, he can't be shamed, and he's perfectly happy lying about anything and everything. The only thing he remotely cares about is getting his way, and he doesn't care how he does that.

Please. Don't give him any semblance of humanity or the benefit of ANY doubt. I never have, and I've never been wrong or sorry. Don't EVER expect anything the least bit "normal" or "humane" or "sensible" or good for the country. Not EVER. It's not in him. I've said that from the beginning, and I've never been wrong about that either.

[Samantha]

41. Well obviously I am not going to defend Bush*

My Republican conservative father used to have an expression that irritated me to death. If you can't see, you will have to feel.

I believe Bush* is blind in the area of diplomacy but I believe he is coming to feel he can't always have his way. It is HE who might be hitting the highway.

[FreedomAngel82]

43. Same here

Remember going into Iraq was planned at the right time for 2002 elections. I got the information that the powers that be want Bush to get out of Iraq and clean up the mess since he never has before. I don't know why he is going to. It doesn't make any sense to me since I've heard we could be there for another twelve years.

[OKNancy]

2. LBN discussion here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1615185

[baby_mouse]

3. WAHHH?

:wow:

[Samantha]

4. Here's a link

"Secret Plan To Quit Iraq
Britain and America are secretly preparing to withdraw most of their troops from Iraq - despite warnings of the grave consequences for the region, The Mail on Sunday has learned. A secret paper written by Defence Secretary John Reid reveals that many of the 8,500 British troops in Iraq are set to be brought home within three months...
read later."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/dailymail/home.html?in_page_id=1766

[mod mom]

35. what a miserable failure in US history. * et al have created generations

of terrorists and bad will (rightlyfully so)toward the US. Watch the thugs declare victory.

[FreedomAngel82]

45. That's what I bet you they'll do

Just like they did with "Mission Accomplished" and the Saddam statue toppling. It'll make them look good for 2006 and 2008.

[FreedomAngel82]

44. We also heard

earlier this past week that Britian was planning to leave Iraq and then the bombings happened. I'm dumfounded at why. I guess they have all the pipelines set up and whatnot?? :shrug: We still have to impeach the bastard for lying and killing thousands. They're up to something. I just don't trust this news but I wouldn't be surprised.

[symbolman]

5. So now he's going to cut and run, after killing all those people?

Figures, that's how lying cowards act. Never had a reason to do it in the first place.

According to their own spin, that will mean that we look weak to the terrorists and they'll hit us again and again - but they'll never admit it was blowback from killing innocents from the beginning, and from the beginning I mean all the way back to his Father and Reagan.

These people are despicable. A sped up version of Nam (I remember it well having been drafted in 1971)..

[Samantha]

6. Yes these people ae despicable

but somehow Bush* will spin it into another "mission accomplished" speech and bow out. He will say they went in to liberate the Iraqi people, he accomplished regime change, he ensured there are no wmd's in that country which can be used to attack the United States, and now the future of the country lies in the hands of the Iraqi's. Hell, we could write the speech for him, symbolman. Can't you hear it now?

[symbolman]

62. Don't forget

911 - 911 -911 -911 :)

Yeah, many here could write it - we should mail in speeches by Bush ahead of time ..

[still_one]

10. they are not leaving it is a planted story

[Samantha]

12. Is this a gut feeling or do you have facts to that effect

Just wondering.

[leftchick]

16. here is something to consider....

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/outrage?pid=2132

~snip~

Now comes a report in the New York Sun by Eli Lake revealing that the Pentagon is building a permanent military communications system in Iraq, a necessary foundation for any lasting troop presence. The new network will comprise twelve communications towers throughout Iraq, linking Camp Victory in Baghdad to other existing (and future) bases across the country, eventually connecting with US bases in Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Afghanistan.

"People need to get realistic and think in terms of our presence being in Iraq for a generation or until democratic stability in the region is reached," Dewey Clarridge, the CIA's former chief of Arab operations (and Iran-contra point man), told the Sun.

The fabled "exit strategy" may be not to exit. Thomas Donnelly, a defense specialist at the American Enterprise Institute, said the new communication system resembles those built in West Germany and the Balkans, places where American troops remain today. "The operational advantages of US bases in Iraq should be obvious for other power-projection missions in the region," Donnelly wrote in an AEI policy paper.

Next time the Bush Administration hints at withdrawing troops, keep these grand plans in mind.

[Samantha]

48. Prior to Bush*s attack on Iraq

the intelligence community was split into two camps: those for the war who thought there weapons of mass destruction; those against who did not think the weapons were there (including Plame).

I believe if we could take a survey, you would find the same split within that community. Some would say we cannot win, get out now; others would say you have to stay in over the long haul to effect a win. I am in the former camp. I understand those in the latter, I just don't agree that it is worth it.

[Totally Committed]

7. Just in time to invade Iran...

I was wondering where we'd get the troops for that.

TC

[still_one]

8. I won't believe it until I see it

how come the "leaked" DSM doesn't make news tell weeks later, and then only minor exposure, while this leak get immediate attention?

Perhaps this is more disinformation

Remember we are setting up 14 permanent bases in Iraq, and the PNAC doctrine says we want a permanent precence there

In my view this is a lie, to distract people from their real intentions, and to try to help them in the 2006 election

In addition, it could never be confirmed, since most of the journalists are embedded, which means that they control what information or distortion they want us to hear

[The Backlash Cometh]

20. It's called PR. Damage control with the media's acquiescence.

I'm now convinced more than ever that the media is not an independent body and has indeed been working with the government to feed whatever the government wants the U.S. population to know to get them quietly to cooperate.

Just had a fight with the hubby yesterday over this very same thing. He withholds pertinent bits of information which might tip my decision, and then when I discover it later through rolling disclosures I generally get a bit irate. When I point out the missing bits of information he left out, and how it would have changed my decision, his response is usually, "Well, if you're going to get mad about it, maybe I shouldn't tell you so much at all." To which he adds, "Don't you trust me?" Y'ello.

My personal cross generally involves petty things, but if it ever reached the level of withholding treasonous acts against the U.S. in favor of putting on a happy face and news of an early withdrawal from Iraq, well, I'd impeach his butt.

[FreedomAngel82]

46. Good points!

Someone leaked this information on purpose and someone had to with Bush's permission. So this is a set up for sure. If the DSM can't get anything then why is this indeed. It's all a set up for Bush and the republicans to win elections in 2006 and 2008 if they do this.

[me b zola]

56. Disinformation, distraction from real intentions, covering their butts...

I was wondering how they were going to handle this:

Iraq Signs Military Pact with Iran - 100 Iraqi parliament want US OUT NOW.

Iraq signs a pact in Tehran agreeing to accept Iranian military training and other cooperation.

Former foes Iraq and Iran announced “a new chapter” in their relations on Thursday, including cross-border military co-operation, dismissing US concerns about Iranian regional meddling.

On his first official visit to Tehran, Iraqi minister of defence Saadoun al-Dulaimi asserted his country’s sovereign right to seek help from wherever it sees fit in rebuilding its defence capabilities.

~snip~

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4058831

[whatever4]

9. Now I'm waiting for this thread to be ridiculed as well

as it seems most topics about the coverups by the government are being meet with riducule. I've participated in a few threads here now, and apparently, this government of ours can do anything, but DON'T call it a "conspiracy".

Because federal conspiracies seem only to be acceptable once they've hit the main news. I am REALLY annoyed with this.

[im10ashus]

13. We're not going anywhere.

They have built permanent bases there and they are going to utilize their presence their to infiltrate the entire region. PNAC? This might be spin for the 2006 elections but we aren't leaving that region. Ever.

[Samantha]

17. Well I was wondering about those bases and the largest embassy in

the world we are building. The only thing I can say all of this was commenced before the incredible drop in public support for the war. I think they will formally announce they are leaving, but will find a surreptious way to hang around. I don't trust them. I think they think this will reduce the amount of insurgent attacks and allow some Republicans to run next year without Iraqgate hanging around their necks.

With the attacks in London comes the question, will we be next? If these attackers are truly motivated by the Iraq war and they carry the violence back to the United States, I hate to think what the people here will do Bush.* I think inevitably Blair will be forced to pull the UK troops, because the English citizens will demand he do so. All that DSM eruption will only further prompt their resolve the UK must leave Iraq.

Additionally, it's possible this is a "preemptive" announcement to withdraw not knowing what huge scandal is bubbling beneath the surface ready to break and tremendously hurt Bush.* I personally think it is the twisting of intelligence to justify the war, and the Miller incarceration. No one knows if Miller will break and talk. But there are signs other eruptions are about to happen on this story; Bush* is probably covering his political ass.

This is going to be interesting.

[im10ashus]

19. Very articulate.

I couldn't have said it better. This will indeed be interesting and it is ALL geared for 2006, as you said, and it's very calculated.

[bklyncowgirl]

14. Mission accomplished in Iraq ! Now on to Iran!

New justifications, new villians, the same old lies.

[leftchick]

15. Pentagon response... "No Way"

Buried in this Reuters article...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050710/wl_nm/iraq_dc;_ylt=Avr8omyvn
IAEbB8O0i6iSAcUewgF;_ylu=X3oDMTA3b3JuZGZhBHNlYwM3MjE-

<snip>

The British government responded to a newspaper report that it and Washington had plans to halve their forces in Iraq by next year by saying this was just one scenario.

A spokesman for the Pentagon, which has said the war in Iraq could last years, insisted it had no schedule for withdrawal.

[no_hypocrisy]

18. Shhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!! It's a SECRET!!!!!

Don't suppose that the pull-out will be in time perhaps . . . for CONGRESSIONAL-SENATE ELECTIONS IN 2006?!! Nah, we don't want to give a timetable to the Terrorists.

[ChiDem]

21. If this is true...

Then I will not shed a tear when the next attack comes..

Most Americans wanted war in Iraq to remove a "threat"

Now most Americans want to pull out of Iraq and leave a bigger threat there than existed before we went in.

If we leave now, it means we invaded to install a real threat to the USA....which means these stupid Americans have put me in greater danger than ever before.

We WILL reap what we sow, and I have no problem with that.

[Samantha]

23. My personal feelings are these

We should pull out. We never should have gone in to begin with. We can never justify the loss of innocent Iraqi people and the loss of lives of our servicemen and women. Perhaps Bush* thinks once the war "ends" it will fade to a distant memory -- not so. So much of what has been lost, including U.S. credibility, will not be regained any time soon. The lesson to be learned here is that WE MUST NEVER ALLOW ANYTHING LIKE THIS TO HAPPEN AGAIN. Once the rumors of war start to percolate, we must be out on the street in huge numbers. We must take back our airwaves (and I do mean our). We must do whatever we can to hold accountable those who perpetrated the Big Lie on the American people and the world (and that part is extremely important).

If the people in Iraq want to be free, they must find their own way. Bush* went in to settle an old score -- score settled. The Industrial Military Machine had to be fed -- Machine fed.

I think we must consider not supporting for 2008 anyone who lent his or her support to this war. We have to take back our country and start sending our politicians and corporations a message -- THIS IS OUR COUNTRY.

[ChiDem]

24. Do you really feel that way ?

Of course we should have never went into Iraq...but we are there now, the people supported it, and our Dem leaders supported it.

The CIA says Iraq is now the largest terrorist training ground on the planet, it wasn't before we went in.

Are you saying we should leave Iraq as it is ? ...this is a very large threat now.


And your view really goes to show that Republicans and Democrats alike cannot tell the difference between a threat...and a non-threat

[Samantha]

26. No question I feel that way

I think if the resources Bush* has poured into Iraq went into buttressing the defense for this country, we would not have the problems with the open borders, rail insecurity, well, you name it. In the meantime, the citizens of this country, the truly poor, those on disability, the education system, all of our infrastructure is being sucked dry so US tax dollars can go into Iraq and elevate the stock of Haliburton.

The Iraqi people have to develop a resolve they want to be free. They have many, many able bodied young men to pick up the torch. We could augment the military with arms and such, and do whatever we can to assist the government, but the onus must be on them from hereon out. No more US blood.

I never believed that line if we weren't fighting them over there we would be fighting them over here. Actually the first person I heard utter this was a comedienne. Someone saw some merit in that "joke" and picked it up as a rationale to buttress continuing that war.

No, no, no, - we have to get out. The ultimate question for me as to whether or not an American citizen supports the war is this: would you send your son or daughter. I absolutely would not send my daughter.

[ChiDem]

28. gulp...

So you want to pull out from Iraq even if it leaves a great threat to the USA ? ...a threat that didn't exist till we created it.

Now you tell me the Iraqi people have to take care of this huge problem we created because you think we have spilt to much blood.

There is no doubt we should be in Iraq today, we broke it, we bought it...I can agree with you that we should never have gone there in the first place, but our republican and democrat leaders insisted that we must....The same democarts you still support today, they voted for war, they voted for the billions we sent there.

Not to come down on the Dems, but it's the truth, and we all want the truth

[frictionlessO]

40. The terrorists go where we go now....

There is going to be bloodshed there no matter what now, whether we stay or go.

100 elected Iraq officials signed a document saying for us to get the hell out of their country.

Iraq and Iran have signed a military treaty.

The longer we stay the worse it is going to get. The more costly it will be for us in the end.

Many of the best and brightest minds the world over have said we need to get out, post haste.

I am personally of the mind that it is time to start drawing down the forces, to show good faith. We need to start making reparations (money, BIG BIG money) immediately. We need to invite in a true multinational force that will not autoamtically have control over just about every major aspect of Iraqi life, despite what our Gov and there Gov say, we still have the final say so on just about anything over there and that is pissing off Iraqis left right and center to the point that they are now starting to believe that their elections were a sham (not hard to believe for us here, I mean look at the last few cycles! yeeesh!). This multinational force needs to be a mix of nations that Iraq had good relations with in the past (France and Russia), as well as nations that it could have good relations with in the future regarding the new full spectrum gov. There also needs to be units of traditionally nuetral countries such as Sweden and Switzerland.

The only way to get this multinational force in there is to hand over the reigns completely and thoroughly to either the UN or the new Iraqi gov. under co-authority with an international body. Nothing in Iraq is ours except for what we brought in and that includes the DU. We dont get to keep bases there, they are Iraqs. We dont get cheap oil or any oil deals from them anymore than any other customer would.

Before we pull out our forces they should be focusing on fixing what they can (ie water and electric) not chasing down 12 year olds and imprisoning them even if that 12 yr old has an AK. Shoot at them till they are dead and or leave but no chasing them down. No more bombing, no more campaigns, no more fire at will ROEs unless an attack has actually comenced. No more raids... period.

Yes this all places our soldiers in extreme danger for a while more so than they have been. But it eventually gets them out of harms way a whole hell of a lot quicker. It is also part of what we owe the Iraqis, our soldiers are brave and courageous for the most part. I think most would be willing to do this if it meant they didn't have to come back for a fifth or sixth tour which in all reality is looking at it kindly (think ninth and tenth tours).

This also will cost soooo much money, but what cost for peace? What cost for saving the lives of innocent civilians?

Then again I could be wrong....

[Samantha]

49. Oh I don't think so, I think you are exactly right

I posted many of the same thoughts above before I got down to your thoughts; you and I are in total agreement. Thank you for commenting.

[frictionlessO]

54. Wow!

Thanks so much Samantha... yes we are pretty much in agreement.

I wish more Dems would just stand up and start saying this.

What I essentially outlined above is not that hard to accomplish especially comapared to all and every other option possible. The extra soldiers we'd lose is paled by the amount we face losing in the long haul. Nevermind the civilian casualties that will be on the recieving end of wherever these newly trained terrorists that have infiltrated into Iraq might turn up down the road.

Further more I firmly believe that the longer we go down this path of preemption, hegemony, and empire the closer to all out war the ME will get. Which is the worst possible thing I can imagine happening because there is no way that any country with dreams of superpower are not going to meddle with that. Thus we will as well... and then what was supposed to be a covert war on terror becomes a very very overt WW-X. Which in turn would mean that any peacenik out there will be drafted.

Then again thats just me and my fears... hope Im not projecting too much.

[Samantha]

47. Cut your losses

Why should American young people over here be sweating the re-institution of a draft when young Iraqi people could be drafted. How long do our young people spend in boot camp getting trained to fight before they are sent over there. The Iraqi people are already there and it's their way of life they must defend.

I do not believe the American people will be more vulnerable if we pull out of Iraq -- the Iraqi people will be. In good conscience, the United States should do what it can in terms of helping the Iraqi people barter their oil for whatever goods they need, even if that is professional soldiers.

I totally agreed with Al Gore's assessment of the situation at the time he made his anti-Iraq war right before Bush*s pre-emptive attack. The fact the Dems in Congress turned a deaf ear to Gore's logical assessment that it was bin Laden shooting at us, and it was he we would be chasing, does not persuade me I need to go along because the Dems did. I don't respect those who did.

So my position is if the US withdraws from Iraq and attempts to become an honest arbitrator of the Israeli/Palestine conflict, then and only then will Americans be safe. It is OUR policies which are killing us, not our values and our way of life as the neoconservatives are fond of saying.

It is also possible the U.S. could barter with the U.N. to send in an international peacekeeping force. Anything is possible (Clinton could help with this type of negotiation and to heck with what Bush* thinks about that -- he's going down anyway).

Yes, when we spilled the blood of the first American, we had split too much. I am a pacifist. I am no apologist for George Bush.* I didn't vote for the man, I don't think he won the election. I do not think he had the Constitutional right to declare a pre-emptive war on Iraq or any other country. If you want Americans to fight for Iraq, round up all the Bushes you can find and send them.

As I said above, the true test for me as to whether Americans should continue to occupy Iraq is the question will I send my son or daughter to fight. I will not. Will you?

Sorry we disagree on this but hopefully we can try to understand each other's positions.

[mwb970]

25. Sorry, it's no longer "our country".

"Once the rumors of war start to percolate, we must be out on the street in huge numbers."

Um, we did that before Bush's Iraq War - not just here but around the world. It didn't change anything.

[Samantha]

50. We did not hold their feet to the fire

It is our country. Bush* et al. are PUBLIC SERVANTS. We as taxpaers pay their salary. When they do not adhere to the Constitution and the will of the people, it's time to throw them out. I believe this is what we are getting ready to do.

[confludemocrat]

34. I agree, no war supporters deserve support in 2008 as prez candidates

They have been accessories to the great wrong that is the Iraq war, have shown themselves if Democrats to be simply "positioners" or stupid rather than showing the courage that will need to be a prerequisite for leadership the post-Bush time like no other time in our history.

Those eliminated would be several candidates who are supported very strongly here.

Republicans don't have the excuse of being triangulators, that bunch are just plain stupid or insane or those two traits in equal measure.

[Samantha]

51. Succinctly put, it's the DLC arm of the Democratic party

They need to go too.

[Gman]

22. The only reason to w/draw from Iraq is to invade Iran

They may already be planning to invade Iran and this is probably the beginning of the plan.

[spanone]

27. Ahh, now he can invade Iran.

[kliljedahl]

29. Hate those damn Flip Floppers

Keith’s Barbeque Central

[Samantha]

52. I detest flip floppers too

but I love that graphic!

[ChiDem]

31. Think about it..

In this thread .. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4059526

There is a claim the US will have a terrorist attack within 90 days, or 3 months. Now we see a story claiming we will start pulling out in 3 months.

Has anyone noticed that Iraq has been very quiet lately ?

The ramp up is starting, the propaganda is in place, just waiting to pull the trigger.

[Samantha]

57. Excellent point

That asinine PR statement they are fond of using, "we have to fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here" just went down the English "tube."

[NewJeffCT]

32. Remember the Onion - "Iraq Withdrawal Strategy - Through Iran"

All too true, it seems.

[in_cog_ni_to]

33. We will be in Iraq for a LONG, LONG time.

We have built 14 military bases and Halliburton has a contract to build 10 more bases. We ain't goin' nowhere. We built those bases for a reason. IMCPO

Tony Blair will pull out to try to save his ass politically, but I really don't think we'll be leaving Iraq for many, many years.

I heard that article on C-SPAN.

[confludemocrat]

36. I dont believe it. This country is too weak to do so

having been gravely weakened politically and economically by this war. This lie is slowly crumbling and the costs in every sphere are mounting steadily. The leader (who will need to be great) will be one who sees and communicates best what needs to be done to repair the mess (our institutions, our integrity, our standing with other nations, our economy, our military, our infrastructure, our environment), that this war even in this short a time has cost us.

[in_cog_ni_to]

39. I should have prefaced my remark with

'IF a repuke stays in office' because I don't think ANY Democrat will stay in Iraq any longer than necessary. I just can't imagine having a 'Great' repuke president. The repukes have an agenda. PNAC. They are right on track with that agenda and as long as they are in power, that agenda will be furthered. HEGEMONY is their goal.

The problem IS...evoting machines. As long as this country votes on those machine, we will always have a repuke prez and congress. With that being said, we will be in Iraq for as long as we vote on evoting machines. :hi:

[Mutley]

37. I'm also thinking that this is probably a planted story.

I have nothing in particular to back that up, other than instinct, the knowledge that they've been building permanent bases over there, the fact that they've been hinting about going to Iran, and next year's elections.

They've stooped lower than this in the past to get votes.

[cynatnite]

38. Here's a story:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050709/wl_uk_afp/iraqusbritaintroops_050709233044

LONDON (AFP) - The United States and Britain are considering the withdrawal of more than 100,000 coalition troops from Iraq next year as one of many options but no decision has been made, the British defence ministry said.

"We have always said that it is our intention to hand over the lead in fighting terrorists to the Iraqi Security Forces as their capability increases," said a defence ministry spokeswoman.

"We therefore continually produce papers outlining possible options... this is but one of a number of papers produced over recent months covering various possible scenarios," she told AFP.

[FreedomAngel82]

42. Are you serious?

Is that good news or bad news? Why? Are they going to Iran or what?

[NNN0LHI]

53. Psst. The US had a secret plan to get out of Vietnam by Christmas...

...for about 10 years running.

Don

[Samantha]

58. Thanks for reminding me about that

I needed it.

By the way, did we ever learn what that "secret" plan was? Even after the war was over? Was it too secret to divulge even then?

[NNN0LHI]

61. The secret part was...

...that there never really was no plan to leave.

Don

[NoPasaran]

55. I guess he's decided to "fight them over here" after all

:shrug:

[shance]

59. Thanks. Not buying.

Will they be printing next that the Bush Administration plans to buy all displaced Iraqis a new house and Pontiac Grand am?

Pardon my cynicism. I know its not warranted. Im just a little skeptical these days.

[NVMojo]

60. It's another leak! We should be hitting more as time goes on!

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/071005Y.shtml

[barb162]

63. I heard there was only to be a substantial reduction in troops

there