Bush administration considers reducing U.S. role in...Iraq security

[Rose Siding]

Bush administration considers reducing U.S. role in maintaining Iraq secur

WASHINGTON (AP) The steady loss of American troops and the terror bombing at the Jordanian Embassy are pushing the Bush administration to revise the U.S. security role in Iraq, shifting some responsibility to emerging local forces.

Secretary of State Colin Powell said Thursday, ''It may be what you want to do is to stand back a little bit more and let Iraqis, local officials ... protect installations.''

That way, he said, ''you don't need a coalition military organization protecting that installation.''

http://www.boston.com/dailynews/219/wash/Bush_administration_considers_:.shtml

[gWbush is Mabus]

1. .

we remove their government and then let them fend for themselves.
don't be surprised if they long for the good 'ol saddam days.

maybe Bush will say "Bring 'em on" again after we pull out.

[Larkspur]

2. Sounds like the same gameplan Reagan and Bush I used in Afghanistan

circa late 1980's after the Russians pulled out.

If Bush reduces US troops from Iraq, that will be a major invitation to Al Queda and other terrorists groups to come in. They probably have agents there already, but with troop withdrawal, the terrorists can build camps to train new recruits.

[NNN0LHI]

3. Yea, but look at the bright side of that

If Al Queda and other terrorists groups come into Iraq afer we leave and begin building camps and training new members we get to invade them again. See what I mean? Always a silver lining.

Don

[Barrett808]

4. I think "terrorists" will be minor players in the mix

The ensuing civil war will be between the Ba'ath and the Shia, with Sunni, Kurdish, Turkmen, and various tribes and jihadis thrown in.

It will be a spectacular mess.

[jamesinca]

5. If the U.S. pulls out in the summer of next year like they say

If they do not have the basic human services in place by then, If they don't have the foreign support they will be in trouble. If the U.S. pulls it's military all the way out and does not get a new U.N. resolution or help they are in trouble. The U.S. is an occupying army along with the British and anybody else that moves troops in there. Here is my concern, it is from the Financial Times a few weeks back.

Because they rejected a United Nations-supervised administration of post-Hussein Iraq, the US and Britain needlessly shoulder most of the legal responsibility for the success or failure of the administration and reconstruction of Iraq. No wonder other nations and groupings, such as India, Pakistan and Nato, have rejected Washington's appeal for troops. Why risk the liabilities of a military occupation under current conditions, especially when a simple Security Council mandate could trump occupation law, with all its attendant burdens?

In an awkwardly crafted resolution in May, authored by Washington and London, the Security Council designated the two victorious nations as the "occupying powers". This title carries all the responsibilities, constraints and liabilities that arise under occupation law, codified in the fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 and other instruments. The UN assumed an advisory role but left the legal responsibility squarely with the US and Britain and reminded other nations of their obligations if they deployed troops in Iraq.

In the last half-century no country requiring such radical transformation has been placed under military occupation law instead of a UN mandate or trusteeship. No conquering military power has volunteered formally to embrace occupation law so boldly and with such enormous risk. And never in recent times has an occupation occurred that was so predictable for so long and yet so poorly planned for.

EDITED BY ADMIN: COPYRIGHT

[Barrett808]

6. Great story -- link?

I'd like to add this to my collection.

[newyawker99]

8. jamesinca

Per DU copyright rules
please post only 4
paragraphs from the
news source and also
provide a link to the
source.

Thank you.

NYer99
DU Moderator

[Mal]

7. There are NO terrorists in Iraq

It is a clear war-zone, with a clear enemy; the US and anyone who helps the US.