Posted on 04/12/2005 9:27:01 PM PDT by Double_Plus_Good
Poland to Pull Troops from Iraq at End of Year By REUTERS
Published: April 12, 2005
Filed at 6:20 a.m. ET
WARSAW (Reuters) - Poland's government decided on Tuesday to withdraw its troops from Iraq at the end of 2005, making official an earlier proposal, Defense Minister Jerzy Szmajdzinski said.
``At the time of the expiry of the Security Council's mandate -- meaning at the end of 2005 -- the operations of the Polish stabilization mission should be finished,'' Szmajdzinski told a news conference after a cabinet meeting.
Poland, a close ally of Washington in Europe and one of the few supporters of its war to topple Saddam Hussein in 2003, has about 1,700 soldiers in south-central Iraq, where it runs a multi-national stabilization force.
Is that the NYT title?
Please use the correct Title
Didn't you or that other freeper Dave just post something about Poland on that masterpiece thread?
You bugg4ed out a long time ago.
HELLO! eight month leadtime is not my idea of a bugout.
Actually, this is only part of the story. The president said there are several conditions under which Poland will stay, such as if the UN mandate is extended or the Iraqi government asks them to stay.
Yeah, really....they're just Planning Ahead.....sheesh.....the MSM is sooooo hungry for BAD news on Iraq.
By the end of the year, most of *our* troops will be out or on the way home. The Iraqis are picking up the slack startlingly fast, and every day Coalition troops are needed less and less. Poland is simply stating the obvious.
"By the end of the year, most of *our* troops will be out or on the way home.."
I wish this was so but I don't think so. The plan is to keep rotating fresh Army and Marine units into Iraq through 2005, and sometime during 2006 decide if a major pull out can be done during 2007. That at least is what I have heard given by two generals in the past week or so. Bottom line is, we still have a lot of work in the area of training Iraqi Army (regular types, special forces units etc.,) and various levels of security police, outfitting them all with adequate gear, weapontry, and in the future vehicles, and beef up their budding airforce and navy. This stuff takes time. We have to also consider how large an army they will need to protect themselves from outside influences. All these things will not happen in a half year. As good as the news is getting concerning how some of the newly formed Army is working, they must increase in size by perhaps 20 fold or more. Similiar comments can be said about the police elements. We are looking at two years plus for these things to be fully in place. Thats my take on the issue based on just what has been going around for the past six months or so. Lastly, just from the Marine Corps. end of things. People where saying earlier that perhaps our troops would be withdrawed. But the IIMEF (2nd Marine Expenditionary Force) now in command in Iraq for all Marine elements, was planned back in 2003 to take charge from the I MEF in 2/2005.
Obviously the command turnover took place on time. There will be many Army Battalions cycling in this summer as others are cycled out. Where in Iraq for a couple years, just as we will remain in Afganistan for some time.
The estimates I've read say that 45% of our units (at least the number of units) will be staying or rotating through, 55% will be going home. Rotating our troops through a combat zone for live fire training is both smart and a good use of an opportunity. If we have to take on Syria, Iran, or China, I'd like to has as many veterans as possible available both in front-line service and in reserve.
No, we're not totally leaving Iraq, but we won't need quite as many troops as we have there now, either.
The Poles have been true allies. Thank you, Poland.
"If we have to take on Syria, Iran, or China, I'd like to has as many veterans as possible available both in front-line service and in reserve."
Let us hope we do not have to confront China. In all humility, I cannot conceive at how we could ever win any form of ground war against them. They would overwhelm us. Huge land mass to have to both take then control etc.. I am sure you have a good idea as how impossible it would be. Far different then lets say trying to just destroy advancing Russian troops into the heart of Europe during the 60/70s, using in place tank battalions, small nuclear army missiles launched and what ever bomber intercepts for instance that could concievably be required. China in todays world is a far different animal. Even North Korea would be no cake walk. If they wanted to fight down to a man, imagine the blood bath. Iran. Anyone guess, but truly it don't make sense to attack a country that you are hoping to somehow institute a real westernized style democracy. Syria. Assad just might find himself in very hot water, if he does not get off his pride chair. Like I have voiced in about ten post replies on mid east affairs in the past few months, we are still waiting for Syria to find, apprehend, and then turn over Izzat el Douri (the red head Saddam general responsible for much of the continued insurgency that operates out of Syria) and his cronies. We have to remember Syria has a similiar Baethist party in control as was in Iraq.
"No, we're not totally leaving Iraq, but we won't need quite as many troops as we have there now, either."
Let us hope your analysis is closer to the real scenario. Any way we look at it, estimates are only starting to come in for public consumption. At best Iraq will not have it's truly nation wide public election for voting in a federal level government until the end of this year or the beggining of 2006. Look at how many years it took our nation to gel into a truly bonified federal republic. We tend to think things can happen over night. I am surprised the Iraqis are actually doing as well as they are at this point. Please don't feel obligated to respond at this point.
Good point.
Doesn't sound like a bugout to me. They approved a mission of limited scope and have decided not to renew at the end of that scope, which is still 8 months away. I think they do see the light at the end of the tunnel, last month the head of the Iraqi police force said they'd be finished taking over internal security matters in 18 months at their current rate of expansion of duties. If his estimate is correct by the end of this year things should be well in hand and the need to foreign forces dramatically reduced.
I am still proud of Polish Soldiers for what they did in Iraq. They were there since the beginning. I know my g-g uncle is smiling down upon them . My g-g uncle fought in Polish Army during the Russo-Polish of 1919-1920. He was one of 20,000 Polish Americans to serve with Haller's Army
They later went on to serve with Jozef Pilsudski
Here is a web page for this legendary army:
http://www.geocities.com/hallersarmy/
What Poland is saying is that their mission should be complete by the end of 2005.
The Deceitful Times is shamelessly making it sound like Poland is backing out of their commitment.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.