You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Iraq-Jordan
US could cut Iraq troops by 20,000-30,000: NY Times
2005-08-07
This is bad according to the NYT, of course, since it's bad for us to be there, bad to leave, bad to stay, natter natter natter ...
NEW YORK - The top US Middle East commander has outlined a plan that would reduce US forces in Iraq by some 20,000 to 30,000 by next spring, The New York Times reported in Sunday editions.

Citing three unnamed of course senior military officers and Defense Department officials, The Times said that the assessment by Gen. John Abizaid, the head of the military’s Central Command, was contained in a classified briefing given to senior Pentagon officials last month. The plan was in line with Gen. George Casey’s remarks in a briefing late last month with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld that Washington hoped to reduce US forces in Iraq sharply within the next year.

“I do believe that if the political process continues to go positively, if the developments with the (Iraqi) security forces continue to go as it is going, I do believe we will still be able to make fairly substantial reductions after these elections -- in the spring and summer of next year,” Casey, the US commander in Iraq, told Rumsfeld on July 27.

However, Abizaid added the caveat in his assessment that it was possible that the Pentagon might have to keep the current levels of some 138,000 US soldiers in Iraq through 2006 if security and political trends do not favor a withdrawal, The Times said.

President George W. Bush has consistently refused to set a date for withdrawal from Iraq, reiterating on Wednesday that the timetable, “depends on our ability to train the Iraqis, to get the Iraqis ready to fight.”

The number of troops is expect to increase temporarily in December to about 160,000 troops, achieved through overlapping the normal rotation of incoming forces and those who have finished their tours, to provide security for elections to a new National Assembly, scheduled for Dec. 15, The Times said.

“General Abizaid has consistently understood that if conditions on the ground warrant it, a smaller coalition footprint could bolster self-government in Iraq,” said Lawrence Di Rita, the chief Pentagon spokesman.
Posted by:Steve White

#10  BTW - if there was a Nobel Prize for Hypocrisy - this NYT article would win it.
Posted by: DMFD   2005-08-07 16:57  

#9  I used to use the NYT to line my bird cage - but then the parrot started to object.
Posted by: DMFD   2005-08-07 16:54  

#8  But Scrappleface is at least believable. Come to think of it, The Onion is believable, too, if you are the Beijing news service.
Posted by: Jackal   2005-08-07 14:12  

#7  Scrappleface and teh Onion are right more often than the NYT - it's a credibility thang. Oh yeah, and they don't pay MoDo for her hyperadolescent rants against all men
Posted by: Frank G   2005-08-07 14:12  

#6  Purdy damn cold both of 'ya.
Posted by: Shipman   2005-08-07 12:57  

#5  Mrs. D., I balance the reference to the NYT by linking to Pravda ...
Posted by: Steve White   2005-08-07 12:21  

#4  I don't know why people are always bashing the NYT. Scrappleface and The Onion make up stuff all the time and nobody gives them crap about it.
Posted by: SteveS   2005-08-07 11:03  

#3  Dr. White, as a moderator, you should be concerned about the credibility of the links established here. I'm surprised to see you lowering the credibility of the Burg by using sources like the NYT.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis   2005-08-07 09:42  

#2  That's rehashed news from last month. Sooner or later MSM are going to be right, like with Bin Laden's and Zarqawi's death or any other stories based on speculations.
Posted by: SwissTex   2005-08-07 09:16  

#1  New York Times - the nagging wife of the world. It spends years haraunging the military and president to get out and as soon as it even thinks about it they start to blame them for cutting and running. These days I put more stock into the Enquirer than I do the NYT, and trust me, that's not much. It is truly amazing that their board members don't grasp the loss of value that has been squandered in "goodwill". It's like watching a nervous breakdown what's going on there.
Posted by: 2b   2005-08-07 05:48  

00:00