For Those Who Think The WH** Will Bring The Troops Home. Read This..

[leftchick]

There is this story in LBN this morning...

Private memos are circulating in Washington, Baghdad and London setting out detailed scenarios for withdrawal of US and British forces from Iraq as early as possible, a Foreign Office source said yesterday.

The policy papers have added urgency because a new Iraq government, to be elected next week if the election goes ahead on January 30 as planned, could set a target date for withdrawal.

John Negroponte, US ambassador to Baghdad, confirmed that a United Nations resolution declared that US and other forces would have to leave if requested by the Iraqi government. "If that's the wish of the government of Iraq, we will comply with those wishes. But no, we haven't been approached on this issue - although obviously we stand prepared to engage the future government on any issue concerning our presence here."

The Foreign Office source said: "Of course, we think about leaving Iraq. There is no point in staying there. There are continually plans in Whitehall, Washington and Baghdad to withdraw when we can.

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12956,13962...


Then there is this from last week.They are such LIARS...

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=2281&ncid=742&e=5&u=/thenation/20050118/cm_thenation/132132


~snip~

Though the media ignored Kerry's statement and failed to do any substantive follow-up research, his comments were well-grounded in reality. On the day of the debate the Christian Science Monitor spotlighted the findings of defense specialist John Pike, whose website, GlobalSecurity.org, located twelve "enduring bases" in Iraq, including satellite photos and names. In March, the Chicago Tribune reported that US engineers were constructing fourteen such long-term encampments--the number Kerry referred to. The New York Times previously placed the number at four.


While the exact figure may change, suspicions of undisclosed US imperial plans--exemplified by permanent military bases--rightfully linger. Before the war, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz suggested moving US troops stationed in Saudi Arabia into Iraq. In October, a survey by the University of Maryland's Program on International Policy Attitudes found that two-thirds of respondents disapproved of a permanent military presence, even though more than half thought the US would build the bases anyway.


Now comes a report in the New York Sun by Eli Lake revealing that the Pentagon (news - web sites) is building a permanent military communications system in Iraq, a necessary foundation for any lasting troop presence. The new network will comprise twelve communications towers throughout Iraq, linking Camp Victory in Baghdad to other existing (and future) bases across the country, eventually connecting with US bases in Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Afghanistan (news - web sites).


"People need to get realistic and think in terms of our presence being in Iraq for a generation or until democratic stability in the region is reached," Dewey Clarridge, the CIA (news - web sites)'s former chief of Arab operations (and Iran-contra point man), told the Sun.


The fabled "exit strategy" may be not to exit. Thomas Donnelly, a defense specialist at the American Enterprise Institute, said the new communication system resembles those built in West Germany and the Balkans, places where American troops remain today. "The operational advantages of US bases in Iraq should be obvious for other power-projection missions in the region," Donnelly wrote in an AEI policy

[Solly Mack]

1. I've seen troop deployment schedules through 2006

I don't think anyone's coming home anytime soon. I also know Iraq will be like Kuwait... another deployment rotation to permanent bases in Iraq.

[ally_sc]

3. pretty sad state of affairs...

and with the looming threat of us penetrating iran...it would seem was this bush's intent long before, during or after the capture of saddam and iraqi occupation?

[Solly Mack]

5. I think his primary goal was bases in the region

to gather up resources and a show of force for more gathering of resources.

[ally_sc]

6. as usual he is well on his way...

i hear boom if iran and israel start up...we probably have spec ops and cia on the ground there already...sad sad time for america...

[Vincardog]

2. Is this a surprise to anyone? If so search PNAC

see the plan for Imperial America written before aWoL stole our White House the first time.

[ally_sc]

4. you just answered my question...those calculating cowards..

i really know this all the time but the truth is so bad nobody wants to believe it anyway and the denial is great for others.

[leftchick]

8. I am sure it is no surprise to most folks here....

I don't see this stuff in mainstream media though, so I imagine the majority of Americans and most members of congress are cluless to the neo-con plans.

[G_j]

7. I think the only "withdrawal" they are even contemplating

is from the streets. The bases will no doubt remain.
And of course, Iraq must be fully privatized for American interests.

[leftchick]

9. they will all just be targets for the resistance.

These people are insane to think this will work out. Talk about pissing our money away.

:puke: