| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq-Jordan |
| Army shifting focus from Baghdad to suburbs |
| 2004-02-09 |
| Edited for brevity U.S. forces in Iraq began scaling down their presence inside Baghdad with the arrival of fresh troops who are mostly moving into bases on the city’s outskirts. Brigadier General Mark Hertling, assistant commander of the departing 1st Armored Division said the arriving 1st Cavalry Division is moving into eight bases around Baghdad, with one in the center. It is a contrast to the 26 bases in the city now and down from as many as 60 last summer just after the Iraq war. The United States has said it is shifting its troop presence to Baghdad’s perimeter to ease newly trained Iraqi police officers and Iraqi Civil Defense Corps soldiers into their eventual role as the capital’s guardians. "This is in conjunction with the stand-up of the ICDC and an improvements in the number of Iraqi police available in Baghdad," Hertling told reporters, but added there was no firm deadline for a complete turnover of Baghdad security to Iraqis. The eight bases on the outskirts of Baghdad will house between 25,000 and 30,000 troops, and will be the only U.S. presence in Baghdad after the 1st Cavalry assumes command on April 15. The 1st Cavalry Division will have a slightly larger area of operations, encompassing Baghdad and its suburbs. The 1st Armored Division was only in charge of the city. Besides handing more authority to the Iraqi forces, the U.S. has said it wants its presence to be less of an impediment to daily life in a congested city. Colonel Mike Formica, commander of the first unit to arrive from the 1st Cavalry from its home base at Fort Hood, Texas, said his troops have been shifted out of tanks into armored Humvees to better patrol city streets. "We’ll be much more mobile and much less intrusive in these neighborhoods," Formica said. "So we won’t have 70-ton tanks running through neighborhoods, destroying infrastructure we’re trying so hard to rebuild." |
| Posted by:Dar |
| #55 If this were baseball I'd bat Zhang 3rd, 4th or 5th. And if anus was pitching i'd be running on every pitch. |
| Posted by: Lucky 2004-2-10 1:27:13 AM |
| #54 Anonymous: Kuwait was created in 1921 by the british colonial office and before that was part of iraq. this was to block iraqi access to the persian gulf. Heck, Iraq was created by the British in 1920 out of part of the Ottoman empire. Just because the British administered Iraq and Kuwait as one unit does not mean Iraq and Kuwait were one country - they also administered Malaysia, Brunei and Singapore as one unit, and today they are three countries.* The idea that Turkish empire in the Middle East should have been made one country is simply ludicrous. (This is like putting all of the Austro-Hungarian empire - Hungary, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia and Romania into one country after WWI). Each of the pieces wanted to revert to what existed prior to Turkish conquest. The British set up too few countries, not too many, leaving Iraq a mess of ethnic and religious rivalries. Kuwait and Mesopotamia have always been distinct, and only Iraqis greedy for Kuwaiti oil have insisted otherwise. The stuff about blocking Iraqi access to the Persian Gulf is another of the lies Anonymous spews with alacrity - the existence of the Iraqi port of Basra is living contradiction of his assertion. * Centcom also administers Iraq and Afghanistan as one unit, but this doesn't mean Afghanistan belongs to Iraq. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2004-2-10 12:30:32 AM |
| #53 Speaking of coherent sentences: i speak as i find get used to it |
| Posted by: Rafael 2004-2-9 11:23:18 PM |
| #52 i speak as i find get used to it. bush is stupid he cant even speak his own language properly. No wonder he refused to debate Saddam before the war, its obvious who could have put together a coherent sentence and its not Dubya.And GW is dangerous he invades other nations and is a terrorist war criminal. |
| Posted by: Anonymous 2004-2-9 11:07:01 PM |
| #51 .... well if you like your leaders stupid and dangerous i guess you have what you want. If these were the only two criteria to be president you'd be in the oval office right now, anon. You possess a plethora of both attributes, albeit your young age might disqualify you? |
| Posted by: GK 2004-2-9 10:45:26 PM |
| #50 Dataman, Bush isn't better than Kerry because of treason. Bush is better than Kerry because he he keeps his promises to the American People and he's not a coward. Charles I disagree on that, he dishonored his uniform and his country when he came back. I have no respect for him whatsoever and I believe he was traitor to his country because of his activities-Aiding and comforting the enemy. |
| Posted by: dataman1 2004-2-9 10:07:10 PM |
| #49 anyway i prefer not to see people as one dimensional i.e evil Oh yes Anon, you're so much more sophisticated than the rest of us. Highlander is right, you haven't the ability to actually engage in a constructive argument. All you can do is regurgitate on cue. Typical troll...and not a very good one at that. Nothing more pathetic than a failed troll. |
| Posted by: Rex Mundi 2004-2-9 7:46:12 PM |
| #48 Got ole Ahab going pretty consistent tonight. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-2-9 7:11:44 PM |
| #47 Kuwait was created in 1921 by the british colonial office and before that was part of iraq. this was to block iraqi access to the persian gulf. so while saddam should have tried a different way to get it back,it is part of iraq or was before. anyway i prefer not to see people as one dimensional i.e evil . Saddam as well as everyone is good and evil. |
| Posted by: Anonymous 2004-2-9 7:08:46 PM |
| #46 Anyone else have the impression that they are tyrint to communicate with a video recording? |
| Posted by: Highlander 2004-2-9 4:09:34 PM |
| #45 Dataman, Bush isn't better than Kerry because of treason. Bush is better than Kerry because he he keeps his promises to the American People and he's not a coward. |
| Posted by: Charles 2004-2-9 3:37:26 PM |
| #44 All I can say is exercise your vote in November. I'll take Bush over a traitor any day. |
| Posted by: dataman1 2004-2-9 3:09:02 PM |
| #43 Sounds like the call center closed early today. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-2-9 3:05:00 PM |
| #42 Anonymous: i never said Saddam was perfect. But you obviously think Dubya is. democracy?? tell that to the prisoners in Guantanamo. yes Saddam was a dictator but so is Bush but in a hypocritical way so he had no right to tell Saddam what to do Saddam was responsible for two wars of conquest (during which hundreds of thousands of Iraqis died) and the torture and killing of 300,000 Iraqis who disagreed with him. It's hard to see how GWB has unnecessarily inflicted on Americans anywhere near the amount of suffering Saddam inflicted on Iraqis. American democracy refers to the rule (via elected representatives) of some qualified majority. The prisoners at Guantanamo are neither those representatives nor part of that majority. Bush certainly had the right to tell Saddam what to do - Saddam had agreed to it as a condition of the US not toppling him for his war against Kuwait in 1991 (as part of the Desert Storm ceasefire terms and conditions). |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2004-2-9 3:01:34 PM |
| #41 Anonymous: If war is the answer its a very silly question. fought for your country why? Did Vietnam invade USA? No. Did Iraq? No. Did US invade both? yes. I guess this means WWII was a silly answer to Hitler's drive to conquer Europe, and Japan's drive to conquer Asia. South Vietnam was a treaty ally of the US being invaded by North Vietnam - the US did not invade South Vietnam any more than it invaded Britain during WWII. The idea that Vietnam's destiny was to exist under Communist rule because they had the same skin color and language is absurd - people of a given ethnic group are not fated to be under one government - just look at Europe, where linguistic groups are scattered all over the continent. Most of the world is divided that way, with small exceptions here and there. The US invasion of Iraq had to do with the tendency of Muslim countries to fund and shelter terrorists, after which they would deny having anything to do with them. Whether Iraq had a direct hand in 9/11 will likely never be proven one way or another, not because it did not happen, but because it took the form of a well-planned intelligence operation, few of which are ever uncovered. After all, most of the spies in the US government were caught only through lucky breaks - typically a foreign defector who told all to US debriefers. Given the random nature of the people who give us information, we never get answers to the specific questions we want - whatever comes in is more like manna from heaven, which is why we're unlikely to ever find out the complete truth about Iraq's involvement in the 9/11 attacks. But the fact is that Iraq's involvement is immaterial - Saddam had repeatedly breached the terms of the ceasefire in 1991, each occurrence of which was a good reason to resume hostilities. After 9/11, Bush finally mustered the political will to take care of the festering sore of Saddam's regime. Both America and Iraq are better off for it. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2004-2-9 2:50:34 PM |
| #40 Anon Are you Al-Gore's speechwriter by any chance? |
| Posted by: Evert Visser 2004-2-9 2:39:40 PM |
| #39 "i never said Saddam was perfect." LMAO!!! That might qualify as understatement of the decade! Btw, are you referring to this prisoner from Guantanamo? |
| Posted by: Damn_Proud_American 2004-2-9 2:39:17 PM |
| #38 i never said Saddam was perfect. But you obviously think Dubya is. democracy?? tell that to the prisoners in Guantanamo. yes Saddam was a dictator but so is Bush but in a hypocritical way so he had no right to tell Saddam what to do |
| Posted by: Anonymous 2004-2-9 2:32:05 PM |
| #37 Anonymous: Right if someone invaded US killed your family and your home was destroyed you would work with the people who did that to you?? patriots???? i think not. That would make the Vichy French, Germans and Japanese from WWII traitors. The fact is that they were traitors, but not to France, Germany or Japan - they were traitors to the dictatorial regimes that had brought them into ruinous wars against the United States. Iraqis who work with Coalition forces are also traitors in this fashion - they are traitors to Saddam, to whom they pledged their allegiance (failing which Saddam would kill them and their families). If Anonymous feels so strongly that Iraqis should be patriots to Saddam, maybe he should do the right thing and move to Iraq, where he can presumably be in a better position to fight for Saddam. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2004-2-9 2:29:44 PM |
| #36 Hey look, it's trying to think! Ok then Anon troll ....do you keep up with current events? Vast majority of Iraqis called the US liberators...except of course the Ba'asthists...and those with tribal affiliations to Sammy. All of your posts would tend to suggest you are at the very least a Ba'athist sympathizer, so of course you would see the US as an invader. It must just eat at you to see all the those freedom loving Iraqis rebuiliding their country without your Sammy-God. How can you stand it? For you, each new day is an exercise in defeat and futility. I love it! Looks like DPA is right in calling this guy the enemy. |
| Posted by: Rex Mundi 2004-2-9 2:24:49 PM |
| #35 Anon, I assumed you were bright enough to know I was referring to the people in Iraq working to police and stabalize their country. See the difference between the US and Iraq is that the US is free and Iraq was a brutal autocratic regime. If I lived in a brutal autocratic regime and another country helped remove that regime with the stated goal of working to liberate and bring democracy to my countrymen, then I would work with the "invaders" and yes I'd be a patriot. You would be a terrorist blowing up infrastructure and terrorizing patriots in the hopes of reaping chaos. |
| Posted by: Damn_Proud_American 2004-2-9 2:24:41 PM |
| #34 9/11/2001. We were invaded and attacked. If you want to continue to be a Saddam and Al-Qaeda supporter, go right ahead. |
| Posted by: lil dhimmi(JC) 2004-2-9 2:24:05 PM |
| #33 Anus, Did Italy invade the US? Did Germany? Did Mexico? Did Spain? Did Panama? Did Granada? Did Afganistan(taliband)? Who did, AQ did. Who's AQ? Take a stab at that. |
| Posted by: Lucky 2004-2-9 2:21:41 PM |
| #32 Right if someone invaded US killed your family and your home was destroyed you would work with the people who did that to you?? patriots???? i think not. |
| Posted by: Anonymous 2004-2-9 2:16:49 PM |
| #31 Ah anon, faced with facts the number dead becomes irrelavent. So why raise the issue in the first place if you didn't have facts. Now the arguement swings to sanctions. Don't blame the US for that one ... that was the UN and their Oil for food love in with Sadam. Check the new on how many folks were in bed with him. Where did the money go ... not to those "killed by sanctions". |
| Posted by: Jim K 2004-2-9 2:16:16 PM |
| #30 "The sooner that WAR CRIMINAL is out of office the safer the world will be." But Wesley Clark was never IN office. |
| Posted by: Steve from Relto 2004-2-9 2:08:57 PM |
| #29 Something tells me our long lost pot-head Steveey is back. |
| Posted by: Rafael 2004-2-9 2:05:47 PM |
| #28 I would call them exactly what they are. Patriots. |
| Posted by: Damn_Proud_American 2004-2-9 2:01:41 PM |
| #27 what would you call the people who work with an invading army??? imagine if someone invaded USA . would you collaborate with them? |
| Posted by: Anonymous 2004-2-9 1:53:27 PM |
| #26 Hey, this guy isn't a "lefty" he's the enemy... anyone that uses the term "collaborators" to describe Iraqis who work with the US can no longer be classified as confused or naive... they are way past that line and are the enemy. In that case....Blah blah blah blah blah...Jewish Plot...Blah blah blah blah blah...The Great Satan...Blah blah blah blah blah... |
| Posted by: lil dhimmi(JC) 2004-2-9 1:51:04 PM |
| #25 Well sanctions also killed the people in iraq. besides it doesnt matter how many were killed.It matters that these lives count for nothing in US govts eyes. US thinks it can tell other nations what to do and invades when they dont do as USA wants. tragic and true. |
| Posted by: Anonymous 2004-2-9 1:49:01 PM |
| #24 Hey, this guy isn't a "lefty" he's the enemy... anyone that uses the term "collaborators" to describe Iraqis who work with the US can no longer be classified as confused or naive... they are way past that line and are the enemy. Just thought I'd point out that we're dealing with something beyond a deaniac here... |
| Posted by: Damn_Proud_American 2004-2-9 1:45:18 PM |
| #23 Hello? Bush thinks Africa is a nation.Still think he should be president? well if you like your leaders stupid and dangerous i guess you have what you want. Blah blah blah blah blah. Gore invented the internet and Osama may be innocent. Bush lied and people blah blah blah blah. Go back to listening to your Rage Against The Machine cds. |
| Posted by: lil dhimmi(JC) 2004-2-9 1:41:31 PM |
| #22 #1 Hey Anon ... on your millions of deaths ... Do a quick internet search on civilian deaths. Hiroshima deaths as of 1950 200,000, Nagasaki 140,000, Nicaragua 1981-90, 15,000, Iraq current, 9,000 plus. Millions? I think not. |
| Posted by: Jim K 2004-2-9 1:39:49 PM |
| #21 If war is the answer its a very silly question. fought for your country why? Did Vietnam invade USA? No. Did Iraq? No. Did US invade both? yes. |
| Posted by: Anonymous 2004-2-9 1:36:52 PM |
| #20 As a NAM vet I take exception to "Hiroshima Nagasaki vietnam Nicaragua and Iraq ring any bells?? all had millions of people killed by the usa government". You dishonor any who have fought for this great country. Of course lefties only see the Unicorns romping in the fields and daisies in guns. You know your hero Kerry shot the Cong in the back and I hope this doesn't shock you too much but is a traitor to his unform and his country after the war. God Bless George Bush. |
| Posted by: dataman1 2004-2-9 1:27:21 PM |
| #19 Hello? Bush thinks Africa is a nation.Still think he should be president? well if you like your leaders stupid and dangerous i guess you have what you want. |
| Posted by: Anonymous 2004-2-9 1:24:01 PM |
| #18 Hey guys, you're all stomping on "Anons" self-esteem. Yup, victimizing him for his lack of intellect and inability to separate reality from unreality. I think a good group hug and a rousing redition of kumbyya (sp) would make the lad (?) feel more welcome. Whaddaya say? Ok, on three, one, two .... nah, just continue to fry the little bastard. |
| Posted by: Jim K 2004-2-9 1:19:22 PM |
| #17 Anon Trolls... This'll probably be the norm, now that Dean is finished. A catsup-swilling boy-toy (Dennis Miller) Clone like Kerry just won't excite them. Hey, RC! Wanna do the naming thing on this phenomenon? You either make up a name or pick a winner from suggestions. To kick off the suggestions, here's some quickies: DDOLT - Disappointed Deaniac Obnoxious Liberal Tool DDD - Disgruntled Deaniac Disorder DDT - Deaniac Delirium Tremens With the RB crowd, you should get some doozies... |
| Posted by: .com 2004-2-9 1:17:19 PM |
| #16 But Rex, Anus has grievences. Anus, the only thing that makes somebody fit to be president is to get elected, just ask Al Gore. |
| Posted by: Lucky 2004-2-9 1:09:32 PM |
| #15 Getting the Iraqi police to guard Baghdad is great partly because the Iraqi police can personnally 'thank' UN and other assorted types for their role in keeping Saddam in power. |
| Posted by: mhw 2004-2-9 1:02:05 PM |
| #14 Rantburgers! Anonymous troll comments are among the lowest form of living matter...somewhere between protists and chorophyll. Just look away and let it stew in a pit of its own filth. Eventually it bores, and moves on. |
| Posted by: Rex Mundi 2004-2-9 12:59:49 PM |
| #13 Come on Anus. Tell us how you really feel. It's a hoot. Hey, start with Haliburton, thats always good. And the awol thing is cool too. You've already hit the religious hipocrite thing, kinda over used but still has some punch. What else? Oh oh, alcoholic daddies boy, Skull and Bones. Dude get into that. WMDs "Bush Lied" or unilateral, the whole world is aghast. Get freaky. |
| Posted by: Lucky 2004-2-9 12:58:15 PM |
| #12 Hey anonymous, hold on a sec here...is that you al-Zarqawi? Yeah, those damn collaborators!!! How dare they want to live in a free and peaceful country? What do they all have against their children getting sodomized by mullahs anyway? These are men of god dammit and they can violate anyone they want anytime they want and those collaborators better like it or else! |
| Posted by: Damn_Proud_American 2004-2-9 12:55:20 PM |
| #11 Sigh. Myths and |
| Posted by: .com 2004-2-9 12:50:26 PM |
| #10 Hiroshima Nagasaki vietnam Nicaragua and Iraq ring any bells?? all had millions of people killed by the usa government doesnt matter which president and Dubya is not fit to be president |
| Posted by: Anonymous 2004-2-9 12:47:57 PM |
| #9 WAR CRIMINAL? Didn't he have a shot at the Triple Crown a few years back? Yeah, The Belmont will usually end those dreams... |
| Posted by: tu3031 2004-2-9 12:39:28 PM |
| #8 Anonymous 2004 barfs up: They have killed more people than Saddam Hussein ever did. Hate to break it to you, but Saddam killed about 1.2 million people in his 25 years. The war to liberate Iraq was done with fewer than 9,000 civilian casualties. I'm not sure you can see the difference but intelligent people can. Please, no need to thank me! |
| Posted by: Steve White 2004-2-9 12:13:00 PM |
| #7 Let me try again. We normally just capitalize the first letter of a proper noun. And war criminal is not a proper noun, now is it? By the way, which war criminal are you referring to? Saddam is out of office -- you may rest easy now. |
| Posted by: Highlander 2004-2-9 12:12:39 PM |
| #6 The sooner that WAR CRIMINAL is out of office the safer the world will be. |
| Posted by: Anonymous 2004-2-9 11:58:48 AM |
| #5 No, you've got it wrong. It's George W. Bush, not George W.C. Bush. Think it stands for "Warrior", whereas your remarks properly belong in a W.C. |
| Posted by: Highlander 2004-2-9 11:51:58 AM |
| #4 Thanks, Governor Dean. What's up after you get blown away in Wisconsin? |
| Posted by: tu3031 2004-2-9 11:46:37 AM |
| #3 TONY! Now that Bill's banned you, you've found a new home! But where's your famous tag line? |
| Posted by: Anonymous2U 2004-2-9 11:42:41 AM |
| #2 George war criminal Bush and his coaltion of the silly have made a dogs breakfast out of things in iraq. They have killed more people than Saddam Hussein ever did. Besides the only reason the invasion took place was because of oil for one and because Saddam didnt kiss Dubya's self righteous hypocrite ass.The iraqis who work with the coalition are collaborators |
| Posted by: Anonymous 2004-2-9 11:32:31 AM |
| #1 This is by far the best news I've heard yet. |
| Posted by: Anonymous 2004-2-9 10:31:10 AM |