Secret plan to quit Iraq

[liberal N proud]

EXCLUSIVE By Simon Walters, Mail on Sunday

08:48am 10th July 2005
Britain and America are secretly preparing to withdraw most of their troops from Iraq - despite warnings of the grave consequences for the region, The Mail on Sunday has learned.
A secret paper written by Defence Secretary John Reid for Tony Blair reveals that many of the 8,500 British troops in Iraq are set to be brought home within three months, with most of the rest returning six months later.

<snip>
Mr Reid's memo, prepared for Mr Blair in the past few weeks, shows that in reality, plans to get them out - "military drawdown," as he puts it - are well advanced.

It says: "We have a commitment to hand over to Iraqi control in Al Muthanna and Maysan provinces in October 2005 and in the other two, Dhi Qar and Basra, in April 2006.

<snip>
"Emerging US plans assume 14 out of 18 provinces could be handed over to Iraqi control by early 2006, allowing a reduction in from 176,000 down to 66,000. There is, however, a debate between the Pentagon/Centcom, who favour a relatively bold reduction in force numbers, and the multinational force in Iraq, whose approach is more cautious."

http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=355291&in_page_id=1770&in_a_source=

I found this compliments of ElsewheresDaughter's post http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1939114

[MadHound]

1. I don't care who is doing it, nor why.

I just want to see ALL the troops out ASAP. Sure, this is probably and election year/politicaly motivated move, but I will take it over the troops not leaving at all.

[Just Me]

2. Secret? I don't believe it.

Someone is more likely creating smoke-n-mirrors to cover-up the neoCONs real plan to expand their war. After all, we are dealing with the "Cover-up CONs".

[mattclearing]

5. That's why it's a secret.

So when suddenly another war breaks out, it doesn't look totally convenient that we got our troops out in time to fight elsewhere.

The new conflict will be the reason for the pull-out.

[GreenPartyVoter]

7. Think they are getting pulled out to the bases surrounding Syria?

[mattclearing]

9. I really hope not.

But nothing surprises me anymore, and these guys just keep doing exactly the wrong thing.

Starting another regime-change operation in the region would be in line with that pattern, and would allow them to pull the troops out without appearing to backtrack on staying longer as planned.

[GreenPartyVoter]

10. We screwed up Afghanistan, broke Iraq... of course it's time to

knock down a few more

[bemildred]

3. Divide and rule. nt

[no_hypocrisy]

4. Why? Maybe we need some military to invade Iran and Syria???

[CrispyQ]

6. In time for the 2006 elections, I suppose.

There are fearful their numbers are so low even election fraud won't fly this time.

[July]

8. Something wrong with the math here?

Drawing down from 176,000? I thought we had 138,000-140,000 U.S. troops, 8,500 U.K. troops -- that would leave "others" at almost 30,000, which, AFAIK, is impossible, given that only a few (Australia, Poland, maybe?) have over a thousand, and they have in the very low thousands.

Do we have more troops there than the government has been saying we do?

Or have I really lost all my math skills?