| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Iraq-Jordan | |
| Bush slaps down top general who called for withdrawal | |
| 2005-08-14 | |
| The top American commander in Iraq has been privately rebuked by the Bush administration for openly discussing plans to reduce troop levels there next year, The Sunday Telegraph has learned. President George W Bush personally intervened last week to play down as "speculation" all talk of troop pull-outs because he fears that even discussing options for an "exit strategy" implies weakening resolve. Gen George Casey, the US ground commander in Iraq, was given his dressing-down after he briefed that troop levels - now 138,000 - could be reduced by 30,000 in the early months of next year as Iraqi security forces take on a greater role. Politically, the administration will be under pressure to signal a significant cut in the US presence by autumn next year to help Republicans fighting mid-term elections in November 2006. Military commanders, however, also need to wind down numbers, the imperative that prompted Gen Casey's comments, according to Dan Goure, a Pentagon adviser and vice-president of the Lexington Institute defence think-tank. "It's number-driven," Mr Goure said. "The military can only maintain these levels in Iraq if it has absolutely no choice. Otherwise, the current pattern of rotations and other commitments mean that they will have to lower numbers." There will, in any case, be a short-term increase in US troop levels to cover the Iraq elections scheduled for December. After that, said Mr Goure, the military has drawn up three broad strategies for cutting troops. Their "best scenario" target is to reduce numbers to 60,000-70,000 by next autumn if Iraqi forces start to make progress against the insurgents. The fall-back option would be Gen Casey's minimum 30,000 reduction by the summer. There is also a rarely-mentioned
| |
| Posted by:DanNY |
| #12 Mrs D -- Plz, you minimuize the argument. The NY Slimes is not the only publication that has taken liberties with General Casey's assessment on troop draw down. Moreover, this month the general made his comments while in Iraq. The point being that when General Casey testified in public to the Senate committee in July, and stated his estimated drawdown (complete with caveats), there was precious little notice. When the general restated his estimates (again, complete with caveats), the MSM here have turned the story into a major battle between President Bush and General Casey. August is a painfully slow month for the MSM in Washington, and the antiwar push is the cause de jour. |
| Posted by: Captain America 2005-08-14 14:42 |
| #11 I doubt the route for maximum pressure on Iraqi constitution makers runs through the comments to the NYT. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2005-08-14 11:31 |
| #10 Mrs. D -- obviously this is for politics. My comment pertained to the lack of substance behind the political vitriol. As for the notion that discussing exit strategies portrays a lack of resolve. The discussion of exit strategies at this time puts needed pressure on those drafting the Iraq constitution. Moreover, the administration has been quite overt in conditioning any discussion of numbers and mileposts with the phrase "depends on the conditions on the ground". |
| Posted by: Captain America 2005-08-14 10:38 |
| #9 I frankly don't see what the hubbub is about It's about politics. In the 2006 Congressional elections Bush's strategy (or lack thereof) will be presented as a failure; "Why haven't you reduced forces in Iraq as you had planned?" There's still too many Clinton Generals in the military and this guy looks to be one of them. He should have been filtered out sooner. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2005-08-14 09:48 |
| #8 The top American commander in Iraq has been privately rebuked by the Bush administration for openly discussing plans to reduce troop levels there next year No E-Ring office for you. Mike |
| Posted by: Mike Kozlowski 2005-08-14 09:35 |
| #7 President George W Bush personally intervened last week to play down as "speculation" all talk of troop pull-outs because he fears that even discussing options for an "exit strategy" implies weakening resolve. Actually, "discussing options for an 'exit strategy'" will be INTERPRETED as weakening resolve. I am SURE that a lot of rational courses and necessary discussion are not being done because the Liberals, Democraps, and the Media are deliberately politicizing the issue. We have troops fighting over burnt out hulks that our ancestors would have abandoned SOLELY because the aforementioned Terrible Three insist on broadcasting images of gun-waving jihadis sitting on said wreckage in close-up shots calculated to exclude the dead bodies of their comrades about said junk-heap. |
| Posted by: Ptah 2005-08-14 06:22 |
| #6 General Casey discussed these numbers at a Senate Armed Forces Committee hearing in July, covered by CSPAN. I frankly don't see what the hubbub is about, other than its August and everyone is out of Washington DC right now on vacation. Incidentially, I don't hear anyone complaining about senators and congressmen being out on vaca for five weeks. |
| Posted by: Captain America 2005-08-14 02:09 |
| #5 That's right, and it was done intentionally. |
| Posted by: Rafael 2005-08-14 00:50 |
| #4 The article itself does not say the general called for anything. The article was mischaracterized by the headline, which probably was written by someone else. . |
| Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2005-08-14 00:48 |
| #3 after he briefed that troop levels - now 138,000 - could be reduced by 30,000 in the early months of next year as Iraqi security forces take on a greater role. And this translates into "calls for troops to be pulled out of Iraq". Nice try. |
| Posted by: Rafael 2005-08-14 00:20 |
| #2 Here's the right link. |
| Posted by: 11A5S 2005-08-14 00:13 |
| #1 bad link |
| Posted by: GK 2005-08-14 00:04 |