U.S. Will Be in Iraq for Years, Powell Says

Los Angeles Times ^ | December 18, 2005 | From Associated Press

[F14 Pilot]

Ex-secretary of State predicts a gradual reduction in troops to start in 2006, but says there will be a military presence for a long time.

LONDON — Former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said in an interview to be broadcast today that the United States would have a military presence in Iraq for years, although a gradual withdrawal probably would start in 2006.

In the interview with the British Broadcasting Corp., Powell said a massive, rapid pullout would be a "tragic

He also said U.S. intelligence services had not revealed their doubts to the Bush administration about the reliability of information on Iraq's supposed weapons of mass destruction.

"What really upset me more than anything else was that there were people in the intelligence community that had doubts about some of this sourcing, but those doubts never surfaced up to us," Powell said in the interview, according to a transcript.

Last week, President Bush said the responsibility for invading Iraq based partly on the faulty intelligence rested solely with him.

In the BBC interview, Powell said he did not believe the U.S. could sustain its current deployment "for an extended period."

"So one way or the other, I think a drawdown will begin in 2006," he said.

"But essentially just to walk away, to say that we're taking all of our troops out as fast as we can, would be a tragic mistake. It's going to be years."

[Dr. Eckleburg]

...there will be a military presence for a long time.

Good. To the victor go the spoils.

American soldiers in Baghdad is a cataclysmic turning point in history, regardless of the political necessity to play down the invasion and liberation of Iraq.

[ScaniaBoy]

To each his own...

LA Times certainly managed to find an "appropriate" headline - and managed to make light of Powell's comments on the pre-war intelligence.

Good to know that there is still one constant in the world, MSM's leftist bias.
/sarcasm

:(

[Hound of the Baskervilles]

"But essentially just to walk away, to say that we're taking all of our troops out as fast as we can, would be a tragic mistake. It's going to be years."

Fine. Whatever it takes. WHATEVER it takes.

[ATOMIC_PUNK]

says there will be a military presence for a long time

Well.....DUH!

[DieHard the Hunter]

> Ex-secretary of State predicts a gradual reduction in troops to start in 2006, but says there will be a military presence for a long time.

Nobody seriously expected Iraq to be a frat-house panty-raid, surely? Over-and-done in one nite? Germany wasn't. Korea wasn't...

[Berlin_Freeper]

Powell is a quitter who left the stage.

Rumsfeld is a fighter and he made clear what the conditions for staying in Iraq are just last week. We will be there for as long as it takes and as long as we are invited.

We were in Saudi Arabia for years until they said they wanted us to leave and then we left. Bush already has a proven track record on this.

Powell is taking money from the left and they want "years" hysterics about Iraq to try to make it seem like we will never have complete victory, that is just BS.

[adamsjas]

says there will be a military presence for a long time
Well.....DUH!

Yup. Still in Germany. Still in Japan. Look at the peace and prosperity we brought to those places.

In a year we will be down to just have a few bases, and some nice airfields right in the heart of the Muslim Empire. And the Iraqis will be the last to ask us to leave.

[Jemian]

there will be a military presence for a long time...

How long have we been in Germany, Japan, Kosovo? Regarding troop pull-out, lets leave in order of entry. First in, first out.

[msnimje]

Please name all countries with which the US is friendly in which we do not have a military presence.

[Thebaddog]

Haiti.

[Thebaddog]

Do you suppose that Powell got played by some of his "friends" that he developed relations with in the Clinton years who convinced him to press for the UN vote before the invasion? Colin was the point man for the strategy that created the delay and probable gave Saddam the time he needed to move the WMDs to Syria, IMHO.

[DieHard the Hunter]

You could be right, mate.

We know he had WMD at one point, and we know he used 'em, both againt Iraq and against the Kurds.

Syria seems like a good place to park 'em.

[stocksthatgoup]

London - Why do all these folks need to make statments overseas?

[R. Scott]

We’ve been in Germany and Japan for years too.

[freeangel]

Hey, Colin--longer than Korea?

[G.Mason]

"Please name all countries with which the US is friendly in which we do not have a military presence."

Cooks, Los Angeles, Wayne,

Oh ... you said countries. I thought you said counties. ;)

[Erik Latranyi]

In a year we will be down to just have a few bases, and some nice airfields right in the heart of the Muslim Empire.

Having bases in multiple countries in the Mid-East will be a dagger in the hearts of the terrorists.

If they thought our presence in Saudi Arabia was "soiling" holy lands, they ain't seen nothing yet!!!!

[angkor]

In a year we will be down to just have a few bases, and some nice airfields right in the heart of the Muslim Empire. And the Iraqis will be the last to ask us to leave.

I think you've nailed it.

I'd estimate our long term presence to be 30 to 40 thousand troops across a handful of bases (not in Baghdad, either), with the drawdown to begin mid-2006 and to reach less than 100,000 this time next year if no a bit sooner.

[hershey]

Powell has a lot to say, most of it self serving. On a side note...forgive me, but I caught Mark Steyn on C-Span late last night...a speech before the Cleremont Society. (I think). If they replay it again and you have a chance to see it, he's terrific. Late in the speech, and it was all too short, he shuffled half a dozen pages aside, kept talking, and I wondered what we missed because time ran short.