U.S. brigades out of Iraq, but not necessarily out of combat

[Dr Fate]

Source: MSNBC

From NBC's Jim Miklaszewski
As of this morning, there are about 56,000 American forces in Iraq. That number will be drawn down to about 50,000 by Aug. 31. As of last night, all American combat brigades are out of Iraq. About 6,000 combat forces, disparate elements of combat brigades remain in Iraq temporarily, but are not currently organized to conduct combat operations.

When combat operations officially end Aug 31, that does not mean that some of the 50,000 American forces that remain in Iraq will never see combat. Senior military official tell NBC News that the so-called advise and assist brigades that do not have a formal combat mission will, however, be combat capable. Some of those forces that will be embedded with Iraqi forces could indeed be drawn into combat.



Read more: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/08/19/4929959-us-brigades-out-of-iraq-but-not-necessarily-out-of-combat

---

Strange that this is not a major LBN topic, but here we are!

Seems positive to me....

[Renew Deal]

1. Of course they're combat ready

That's like saying the backup quarterback is ready to play. :shrug:

[Dr Fate]

2. I'm no military expert...

...but my next question/hope involves costs.

Will this reduce the costs of our Iraq adventure, or will it stay about the same? Seems like it should reduce at least some spending, which would be a good thing.

Am I right or wrong, folks?

[Javaman]

12. it will stay the same..

we still have an embassy the size of vatican city to run with at least 50,000 employees.

The Eastern American Empire.

[No Elephants]

13. Roman Empire Redux, complete with our Kings Herod.

Eschatology alert!

[damntexdem]

3. Well, the ones that are out of Iraq are out of combat.

But not only are the 50k still in Iraq only technically out of combat, those who are out are subject to possibly being returned to Iraq, and to combat.

[Dr Fate]

4. My main question right now is: Will this cost tax payers less, or is the war budget still the same?

If this means LESS military spending that frees up resources for domestic spending, then I'm very happy.

If not, then I'll soon be joining the cynics, to a degree.

[onehandle]

5. 4,500 forces will continue to hunt terrorists in Iraq. Combat continues.

'About 4,500 American Special Operations forces will also continue to conduct counter-terrorism operations, hunting down and capturing or killing al Qadea members. While these operations are not considered formal combat mission, they often do result in combat tactics.'

That last sentence is like being a little bit pregnant.

[fogonthelake]

6. Your subject line would make a good headline (topfold) of the nytimes.

[onehandle]

7. Sounds like you don't think it's accurate.

How is it not accurate?

[fogonthelake]

9. I was giving you a compliment as it would be great if the nytimes

and other media would use it.

[onehandle]

10. Ah. Sorry.

Thanks.

:hi:

[fogonthelake]

11. no problem. you have a good evening.

[Taverner]

8. You know what this reminds me of?

And I know its a dead horse, but this reminds me of Nixon's Vietnamization Program - Phase out US Soldiers, phase in Iraqi ones...

But it might actually work, since there is no NVA in this case - unless you are talking about Iran

AND THAT is scary!