Iraqi PM-designate: U.S. could start pullout in 18 months

CNN ^ | April 24 2006

[jmc1969]

The Shiite Muslim politician tapped as Iraq's prime minister said Monday that he thinks U.S. troops could begin withdrawing in 18 months or less if his country's security forces get up to speed.

In an interview with CNN, Prime Minister-designate Jawad al-Maliki also promised to tackle the problem of militias, the armed groups thought to be fueling sectarian violence in the country.

Al-Maliki said the private forces that have held sway on the streets of Iraq must be "disarmed."

During the interview, al-Maliki said Iraqi must establish a "nationwide reconciliation" in the ethnically and religiously diverse country, torn by bloody, sectarian vendettas.

"I call on the Iraqis in all of their different factions and ethnic groups ... to go back to what they were like in Iraq, when the relationships were good between them and there was no prejudice based on their differences," he said, citing the many groups -- including Arabs, Kurds, Turkmens, and Sunni Muslims, Shiite Muslims and Christians.

Asked when the U.S. troops would begin departing the country, al-Maliki said he "heard from the leadership of the multinational forces that they are expecting that to be in 18 months."

"I think that it will be less time than that because I am determined to provide the Iraqi forces with all of their needs."

Al-Maliki said he is optimistic "about preparations in speeding the building of the security forces, not only to take over the security file [but] also to face the security challenges."

He added a much-repeated caveat: "The presence of the multinational forces is connected directly with our security forces' ability to provide security. If we don't have the security and military ability to provide security, the multinational troops will not be able to leave."

[Marine_Uncle]

ping

[Marine_Uncle]

"Jawad al-Maliki also promised to tackle the problem of militias, the armed groups thought to be fueling sectarian violence in the country. Al-Maliki said the private forces that have held sway on the streets of Iraq must be "disarmed."
Let us hope this guy is for real. If so. Things are going to get interesting. Especially if the right DM and IM are selected to give wide ground to the army and police forces.
At times it almost sounds silly writing like this. I realize I probably are writing no brainers. Duh on me.
Maybe fatso is starting to take another look at his future.

[Marine_Uncle]

"I think that it will be less time than that because I am determined to provide the Iraqi forces with all of their needs."
Well he made the commitment. No one is going to take this lightly due to the current conditions being as they are. Things could actually get better. Of course there is going to be continued bloodshed. But hopefully it will be mostly the sandgoons taking their final breaths.

[speekinout]

Al-Maliki said Iraqi society must be cleansed of terrorism, the government must be rid of "administrative corruption" and factional militias must be disarmed.

If he can manage that, the whole Iraq mission will be a success. Maybe still messy, but then so is our political system.

I still don't know if we like this guy, but his priorities seem to be right.

[Dog Gone]

I think the timetable is probably realistic. It would be accelerated if we could nab the two or three top dogs in al-Qaida leading that group.

[conservative physics]

If we don't declare victory and pull the troops out before the November elections... the elections will be a blood bath for Republicans I fear.

[strategofr]

"If we don't declare victory and pull the troops out before the November elections... the elections will be a blood bath for Republicans I fear."

I agree.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1617154/posts

Strategofr's 2006 Passover Analysis of the U. S. and the World
April 18, 2006 | Strategofr

[jmc1969]

Americans want signs of progress in the War on Terror not the US cutting and running from Iraq.

Cutting and running would be horrific for the GOP this fall. What Americans want to hear is either progress in Iraq or no Iraq at all.

The problem is if the US pulls out early the violence will be a hundred times worse then what we are seeing today and 100% of Americans will say we failed miserably in Iraq come election day.

You want to do well in November here are four ways to do it in the WOT.

1. Catch Zarqawi and/or Bin Laden
2. Catch Mullah Omar and/or Zawhiri
3. Clean out Baghdad and Ramadi with major operations
4. Start unloading on Achminiwacko verbally the way we did with Saddam in 2002.

[onyx]

Thank you for the ping!

[Dosa26]

Sorry we like it here. Get your Sheite together and we can start taking Iran. (half-kidding)

[jmc1969]

Ping

[patton]

A light in the darkness...

[NeoCaveman]

18 months, I'd be shocked if it didn't start sooner....

[jmc1969]

If you are talking minor cuts then you are right.

By the Fall I suspect we will be down to around 100,000 troops in Iraq. But, to get into the blow 50,000 range will probably take months longer.

However, people want success in Iraq not America cutting and running. Cleaning out Baghdad, catching Zarqawi and dealing with the militas is the way to give them that not cutting and running.

[NeoCaveman]

I agree with your analysis, give or take 10,000

[Marine_Uncle]

To add a pinch as what jmc1969 stated. I don't think the administration nor CENTCOM really want to withdraw all our troops any time soon. As the Iraqi army/police/border patrols/special commando units continue to increase in size, experience and effeciency, and BN/Regiments/DIV level for some 250K, move to solid level 2 and some to literally level 1 classification (5 levels...5=near useless 1=fully self sufficent in every way including own HQ/supply depots/aircraft and trucks to fully supply them from socks to weapons), we continue to move out of their way. We have moved out of many FOBs at this point that we once fully operated out of.
However. This army is still quite young. As good as some of their officer corps and NCO's have become they still need a stable hand, a helper. The longer we have them working closely with us, the more they pick up on US Army/Marine ways of fighting. The more they learn and gain experience in how to run BN level and higher operations.
Logistics/Intel/Administration are just as much key to their new armies success as their ability to fight.
How much equipment do we train them in that we are supposedly going to consider leaving behind. They need fully equiped depots to maintain say any humvees and trucks we leave them. Same goes for say TOW weapons. Someone has to learn how to take care of this stuff.
The list are long in what still needs to be accomplished. And like any army just budding, they need time to fully develop.
So just from these few items one can see that perhaps a Division or more would be desirable to stay in Iraq and rotate in and out over a few year period if the Iraqi welcome us to do so. And quite frankly, that is what I believe is planned. The 18 months is for public consumption most likely.
Lastly. Those that remain can be hulled up in well stocked, more comfortable bases, sort of isolated if need be. The convoy system via. Kuwait would off course have to continue but in much lower levels, extremly well protected by aircav.
Lastly. You can bet the farm that there are arrangments for certain US units to stay in country, such as SOCOM. And we most likely would continue having some airforce personel to help them perhaps in a next phase of obtaining aircraft, fixed/rotary and the training involved. Again. A small foot print force.
IMHO, it would be foolish not to stay in their country if we are welcome to do so. We have how many troops sitting in South Korea as I write.

[Marine_Uncle]

Your welcome

[Marine_Uncle]

I cannot help but wonder what Allawi will do at this point. He has been a real trooper. Surely he and his family must have had a nice place to live in London. But surely his heart is in Iraq.