[cannotseethe]

Recently, with all the bravado of former President Bush's
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
, the US announced the end to combat operations in Iraq. NBC, which was given exclusive access to this story, covered it excitedly.

Unfortunately, it appears combat operations are far from over. The 50,000 troops to remain in Iraq will almost surely be involved in military operations. Interestingly, the Associated Press does not agree with the characterization:

Originally Posted by To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To begin with, combat in Iraq is not over, and we should not uncritically repeat suggestions that it is, even if they come from senior officials. The situation on the ground in Iraq is no different today than it has been for some months. Iraqi security forces are still fighting Sunni and al-Qaida insurgents. Many Iraqis remain very concerned for their country's future despite a dramatic improvement in security, the economy and living conditions in many areas. As for U.S. involvement, it also goes too far to say that the U.S. part in the conflict in Iraq is over. President Obama said Monday night that "the American combat mission in Iraq has ended. Operation Iraqi Freedom is over, and the Iraqi people now have lead responsibility for the security of their country." However, 50,000 American troops remain in country. Our own reporting on the ground confirms that some of these troops, especially some 4,500 special operations forces, continue to be directly engaged in military operations. These troops are accompanying Iraqi soldiers into battle with militant groups and may well fire and be fired on.

What do you think? More empty pomp and circumstance, this time Obama style? Sour grapes that AP wasn't given exclusive rights to the story?

[Tocsin]

Whether its declaring victory in Iraq, or promising results in a mideast peace agreement between the Israelis and Palestinians, Obama is desperately looking for something he can claim progress on, just to bolster the outcomes of the midterm elections for the Democratic party in congress.

If the Republicans take back control of either branch of Congress, Obama will find himself in the same dire straits that Clinton faced in the nineties when he was eventually impeached.

It doesn't matter if anything he claims is actual progress or not - he just needs to make people feel like he is making some sort of progress, so it's going to be "spin, baby, spin" for a long time to come.

[Arkeph]

It is significant that about 100,000 soldiers were pulled out of Iraq, but the AP is correct in its refusal to call the current garrison of troops "non-combat" soldiers. There are special ops who will be performing anti-terrorism operations and many soldiers who are going to be advising Iraqi units, which will require them to be close to, if not at, the front lines. Lastly, of course, there's the private security forces, who still perform a wide variety of roles.

With the date of Iraqi independence from American involvement being in the distant future, it's politically necessary to draw an arbitrary line in the sand defining a "milestone" toward that eventuality, but this one isn't even an honest milestone.

[LaoTzu]

I agree that the fighting isn't over; but the people doing the majority of the dying will not be American. We'll see what happens in the coming months, but for the time being I am willing to allow the Pres. his 'War is Over' moment. I might change my perspective, but for now it's better to just chill.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
is a list of current US deployments in the world. 50k sounds like a lot... but it doesn't have to be considered so.

[Booko]

I think the AP is being sensible in pointing out what is obvious to anyone who knows anything about the military.

If you're in theatre you aren't really "out of combat."

[Danisty]

	Originally Posted by Booko To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I think the AP is being sensible in pointing out what is obvious to anyone who knows anything about the military. If you're in theatre you aren't really "out of combat."

Yup, it's a matter of terminology. There are no more "combat brigades" in Iraq. You don't have to be in a combat brigade to be involved in combat though. People are taking that terminology to make it look like something it's not.

[Booko]

	Originally Posted by Danisty To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Yup, it's a matter of terminology. There are no more "combat brigades" in Iraq. You don't have to be in a combat brigade to be involved in combat though. People are taking that terminology to make it look like something it's not.

Yes, it's something of a political sop to the anti-war crowd and was always meant to be that, no matter which party it's coming from.

It only works because so much of the American populace is so woefully uninformed in matters of war these days.

[Autumnleaf]

Ideally they'd all be pulled out, if it were up to me I would send all the Americans home. The real issue is that everyone knows that if all the Americans go home the puppet government will fall fast. That will be bad press for whoever is in office when it happens. I guess Obama isn't prepared to take that kind of heat at this time.

[Commissar]

Either way, getting that many troops out of Iraq is nothing to turn your nose up at, and it's not like we could realistically pull out of the Middle East entirely anyways. As soon as we'd left, they'd be at each others' throats in a second. They're like bickering children; you can't let them out of your sight for a minute. Such is the duty of the "Global Police".

[mindstate]

According to this army times article the troops that remain in Iraq are combat troops, but they changed their designation to Advise and Assist.

From the article:

"Soldiers from the 2nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team of the 25th Infantry Division are deployed in Iraq as members of an Advise and Assist Brigade, the Army’s designation for brigades selected to conduct security force assistance.

So while the “last full U.S. combat brigade” have left Iraq, just under 50,000 soldiers from specially trained heavy, infantry and Stryker brigades will stay, as well as two combat aviation brigades."

Original article:

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Could the AP story be more accurate?

[HackerX]

Eh?

The implication is clearly that US instigated (active) combat operations will cease.

It's no different to say, a peacekeeper operation not being an active combat operation (despite potentially seeing combat).

The important point, I believe, is that the Iraqi army is now in control over Iraqi security. The US (etc) is providing support, training and experience.

[zibber]

	Originally Posted by LaoTzu To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I agree that the fighting isn't over; but the people doing the majority of the dying will not be American.

It has been that way all along.

	Originally Posted by mindstate To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	According to this army times article the troops that remain in Iraq are combat troops, but they changed their designation to Advise and Assist.

I like that trick. It's like how "torture victims" became "unlawful combatants subjected to enhanced interrogation methods".