|
Post-Election NYT: Get Out Now? Not So Fast, Experts Say
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 administrations 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. The logic of this is you put pressure on Maliki and force him to stand up to this, General Zinni said in an interview, referring to Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, the Iraqi prime minister. Well, you cant put pressure on a wounded guy. There is a premise that the Iraqis are not doing enough now, that there is a capability that they have not employed or used. I am not so sure they are capable of stopping sectarian violence. Posted by: .com 2006-11-15 |
| http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=172054 |