by Mark Silva
It was Donald Rumsfeld, the former secretary of defense, who famously said, "You go to war with the Army you have.''
And now President Bush effectively is saying that the United States will fight the war in Iraq with the Army it has there through the end of his term:
A Marine battalion of about 1,000 will come home in November, the president said, but not until February 2009 -- after he has left office -- will more forces start withdrawing: An Army brigade of about 4,000 will leave then, along with about 3,400 combat support forces - military police, construction engineers and the like.
In total, this means that about 8,000 people will be coming home, without replacement, by February. And in the first half of the new year, Bush said today at the National Defense University in Washington, more troops should be able to withdraw from Iraq - conditions permitting.
While all five of the combat brigades and the Marine battalions and expeditionary force that were deployed to Iraq as part of the president's "surge'' of military forces have returned, the pace of the coming withdrawals - 1,000 this fall, and another 7,000 by February - is perhaps slower than the pace that Republican presidential nominee John McCain may have anticipated, based on the "success'' of the surge.
And it certainly is slower than the two-brigade-per-month withdrawal that Democrat Barack Obama is proposing. Which means the debate over the war will continue into Election Day on Nov. 4.
"Reduced levels of violence in Iraq have been sustaiend for several months,'' Bush said in his address today. "The progress in Iraq is fragile and still reversible,'' he said, but General David Petraeus, recommending the pace of withdrawals in the months ahead, has told him it appears "durable.''
Why not a swifter withdrawal?
"What I can tell you is that Gen. Petraeus made his recommendation up through the change of command,'' Dana Perino, the White House press secretary, said today.
"I can't tell you why he didn't choose something else, but he did accept their recommendation,'' Perino said. "President Bush thinks that taking 8,000 troops out is the recommendation from the Pentagon and the one that is prudent now... Either way, people would question, should we send more or send less... He thinks he hit it about right.''
"The bottom line,'' Bush said today, "is while the enemy in Iraq is dangerous, we have seized the offensive... We have been able to carry out a policy of return on success.'' He called today's announcement "the next step forward in our policy of return on success.''
All of the "surge'' forces have come home, and military deployments have been returned to 12-month tours of duty. "This change will ease the burden on our forces,'' the president said. "This change will make life for military families easier.''
Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said: "The president's plan to reduce force levels in Iraq may seem to signal movement in the right direction, but it really defers troop reductions until the next administration. More significant troop reductions in Iraq are needed so that we can start to rebuild U.S. military readiness and provide the additional forces needed to finish the fight in Afghanistan.''







Comments
Why doesn't someone ask how many soldiers are in a brigade? Five to one he doesn't even know. Commander in chief? If Obama joined the Army (there's your laugh for today), he wouldn't even qualify to be a corporal.
Posted by: Daryl | September 9, 2008 11:25 AM
So are there more or less troops in Iraq and the related areas of the middle-easy today as compared to before the "surge"? Does this mean the "surge" worked, or is still working, or hasn't really worked as it isn't providing the outlined goal that were set to consider the "surge" a success? Somebody help me here.
Posted by: kg123 | September 9, 2008 12:11 PM
The tragedy of this disaster in Baghdad is, it wasn't even an imperative. The Bush-Cheney Regime lied, distorted, deceived,, even had the President play-act, that the war was over. As a veteran, I was ticked that this person, MIA while the Vietnam War was raging, had the stupidity to agitate the enemy, with his: " Bring 'em on!! " pseudo-challenge !! This is a leader, this is a President, this is a Commander-in-Chief ?? That moment was one of the lowest points, I have ever witnessed in my 50 years of observing our national leaders !! The astounding fact that he was re-elected, told me then and there, that most voters do not care who or what the man, or woman, is, in our White House, just as long as they mouth the words, they want to hear. That is the lamest of reasons for voting for anyone!! The problem is, it might happen again, in this national election, we are now engaged in and that would be, like the hurricanes, stacking up, down by Florida, waiting to wreak more havoc on America. What a tragedy, in every sense of the word !!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.
Posted by: Don Fitzgerald, Chicago | September 9, 2008 12:31 PM
Explain to me how it is possible that:
"8,000 people will be coming home, without replacement, by February. And in the first half of the new year, Bush said today at the National Defense University in Washington, more troops should be able to withdraw from Iraq - conditions permitting"
When it was just reported yesterday that Wisconsin's National Guard will be sending as many as 3,500 to Iraq in February??? That's almost half of Wisconsin's National Guard, and the largest deployment for the state guard to a combat zone since World War II.
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=792269
Posted by: SouthSideD | September 9, 2008 3:40 PM
Bush doesn't clean up after himself. Pig. He made the mess because he did not know how to be a prez in peace time. He made a mess to distract us while he and the buddies raided and raped America and her citizens.
Posted by: Vivian | September 9, 2008 11:09 PM
The raw data of how many troops have been in Iraq each month since the war started was published yesterday. This withdrawl still leaves more there than when this thing started.
The numbers have jumped all over the place from month to month from 116,000 to 165,000. This "withdrawl" is really nothing but an election gimic and Bush wanting to leave Washington looking somewhat better than he has.
Posted by: Carol O | September 10, 2008 7:51 AM