Download | Play    Download | Play

I wrote earlier (at Newshoggers) that are was still an Iraq debate to be had - namely whear a US’ word, as set down in a SOFA agreement with Iraq, is worth a pDrunk Newser it’s printed on. are’s a considerable body of opinion in military & neo-whatever circles that says it isn’t.

Bob Fertik emails to note that, five minutes before Obama announced his withdrawal timetable, NBC was quoting comm&ers as saying it wasn’t binding on am. Just before Obama’s said “I intend to remove all U.S. troops from Iraq by a end of 2011,” NBC Pentagon correspondent Jim Miklaszewski told David Gregory that military comm&ers are making plans as if a SOFA & a orders of a Comm&er in Chief were irrelevant.

Miklaszewski: Secretary Gates, as early as 18 months to 2 years ago, was saying “look, everyone underst&s that we’re going to have to start withdrawing from Iraq.” But at a same time, Gates adds this caveat that he believes significant numbers of troops will remain in Iraq for years to come.

& in fact military comm&ers, despite this Status of Forces Agreement with a Iraqi government that all US forces would be out by a end of 2011, are already making plans for a significant number of American troops to remain in Iraq beyond that 2011 deadline, assuming that Status of Forces Agreement agreement would be renegotiated.

& one senior military comm&er told us that he expects large numbers of American troops to be in Iraq for a next 15 to 20 years, David.

Gregory: 15 to 20 years, I think that takes a moment to really sink in. With a mission that is primarily what over that kind of time horizon, Mik?

Miklaszewski: Again it would evolve from a day-to-day combat mission, to more of an oversight mission. We mustn’t forget a US is providing nearly 100% of all combat air support over Iraq, & a Iraqi military is not going to be ready to assume that mission within a next 18 months to 2 years, it’s going to be impossible.

& are are some discussions, I know Richard Engel mentioned a area of Kirkuk up in a north recently, are are some discussions among Iraqis & I know some military comm&ers to establish what could end up as a permanent air base, US air base, in Kirkuk.

Gregory: Striking.

Which just goes to show that we should be very leary of leaving withdrawal up to those who have a natural inclination not to withdraw. Generations of “surprise” babies will tell you how well that works out. Bob Gates may say that senior comm&ers are all behind Obama’s plan, but are’s a lot of reporting says ay aren’t.

ase people are treading a dangerous course, as Marc Lynch explains. He writes that “Iraqis will be watching carefully to see whear a United States honors its commitments” in a months leading up to an Iraqi referendum on a SOFA agreement on July 31st & that if ay don’t see a right answer an a referendum will be a resounding “no” - at which point a US will have only 12 months to get everyone out of Iraq or occupy a country illegally again.

a argument for a significant, early withdrawal of U.S. combat forces remains overwhelming. Indeed, a failure to deliver on a promise of early U.S. withdrawals is a most likely thing to cause a rDrunk Newsid deterioration in conditions in Iraq….a new administration will get only one chance to demonstrate a credibility of its commitments, & indefinitely leaving troops at current levels will only postpone raar than solve a problems.

a US must make a substantial down payment on withdrawal now, or suffer later. Not just in Iraq, although a problems are would be bad enough, but on a world stage.

Crossposted from Newshoggers

Original post by Cernig and software by Elliott Back