Early Troop Pullout Would Leave Iraq ‘a Mess,’ General Says

American Forces Press Service ^ | Gerry J. Gilmore

[SandRat]

WASHINGTON, July 6, 2007 – A premature withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq would leave the country at the mercy of its enemies, a senior U.S. military officer said today. Thanks to surge-provided reinforcements, U.S. and Iraqi security forces participating in Operation Marne Torch are now making “significant progress” in knocking out insurgent sanctuaries located within his battle space, Army Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch, commander of Multinational Division Center and the 3rd Infantry Division, said today during a satellite-carried teleconference with Pentagon reporters.

However, “it would be a mess,” Lynch emphasized, if the surge forces were withdrawn as part of an early pullout of U.S. troops from Iraq before the mission is accomplished.

“Those surge forces are giving us the capability we have now to take the fight to the enemy,” the general said. “The enemy only responds to force, and we now have that force.”

Operation Marne Torch is one of several ongoing operations that are part of an overall offensive against insurgents in Iraq called Operation Phantom Thunder, which began June 15, once all of the surge troops were in place. President Bush directed a deployment of about 30,000 additional U.S. troops to Iraq earlier this year as a surge of forces to assist the Iraqi government in confronting the insurgency.

Since it was launched three weeks ago, Operation Marne Torch has netted 41 enemy weapons caches and 54 improvised explosive devices, and destroyed 45 boats used by the enemy to transport personnel and ordnance across local waterways, Lynch said. About 230 enemy fighters have been detained, including 28 high-value insurgents, he added.

“We can conduct detailed kinetic strikes, we can do cordon and searches, and we can deny the enemy sanctuaries,” Lynch said. “If those surge forces go away that capability goes away, and the Iraqi security forces aren’t ready yet to do that (mission).”

A drawdown of U.S. forces would embolden the insurgents, Lynch said.

“You’d find the enemy regaining ground, reestablishing sanctuaries, building more IEDs (and) carrying those IEDs to Baghdad, and the violence would escalate,” the general said.

Current operations are directed at knocking out Sunni-insurgent strongholds in the Tigris River valley region, including the Arab Jabour area south of Baghdad, Lynch said, adding future operations will go after Shiite-insurgent sanctuaries.

American and Iraqi troops are now manning 29 patrol bases situated across Lynch’s area of operations, which is about the size of West Virginia. About 70 percent of his area has been cleared of insurgent activity, he said. And, ongoing infrastructure improvements and jobs projects also are helping to make life better for local Iraqis, Lynch said.

Iraqis in his region are fed up with insurgent-generated violence, Lynch said, noting that al Qaeda’s harsh tactics in particular have backfired on the terrorist group.

Meanwhile, Lynch’s soldiers and Iraqi security forces continue to make progress against insurgents.

“I’ve got great confidence because I’ve got great soldiers,” Lynch said, noting that his troops remain determined to defeat the insurgents.

“They want to fight terrorists here, so they don’t have to fight terrorists back home,” the general said.

Lynch acknowledged the American public’s impatience with the pace of securing Iraq, but he cautioned against applying arbitrary dates and timelines in gauging success in a highly variable environment.

“I now have the forces I need to conduct that mission,” Lynch said. “What I can’t tell you is how long it’s going to take to secure the population and defeat sectarian violence.

“It’s going to take as long as it takes, and you just have to be sensitive to that,” he said.

[SandRat]

FR WAR NEWS!

WAR News at Home and Abroad You'll Hear Nowhere Else!

All the News the MSM refuses to use!

Or if they do report it, without the anti-War Agenda Spin!

[Dr. Frank fan]

A premature withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq would leave the country at the mercy of its enemies, a senior U.S. military officer said today.

Who cares about that? It would give the (D)s a great talking-point with which to bash Bush and the (R)s and thereby win elections. Which is the important thing. I mean, let's just try to keep some perspective here. This is about elections and winning them so there can be more (D)s in elected offices. Who cares what, like, happens in Iraq of all places?

[do the dhue]

When will the people on the left, our media, and the leaders of the Demoratic Party wake up and recognize that if we leave too early, then we turn the country over to terrorist?

People on the left, our media, and the leaders of the Demoratic Party are a National Security threat and should be treated as such.

[do the dhue]

What you say is exactly how the Demorats are acting.

We need a law that says, if people put their Party before our Nation, then they should be hung, shot, exiled to Iran and shot again with an ICBM.

Going into negotiations, I always ask for more...

[syriacus]

Even if things were bad in Iraq today, it would be dumb to assume either of the following

1. we should pull out of Iraq
   or
2. things would be better if Saddam had remained in power in Iraq

.Who can prove that Iraq would less of a threat to world peace or its own people today, if Saddam and his sons had remained in power?

Pre-War "containment" of Saddam failed more each day.
1. The oil-for-food program was corrupt
2. The weapons inspections were a farce
3. US and allied planes were targeted
4. Uninspected flights to Baghdad gutted the sanctions
5. Terrorists were training in Iraq
6. Saddam supported terrorism - $25,000 to each family of a suicide bomber (Thanks, Prost1).
7. Saddam brutalized our fellow human beings

Saddam was thumbing his nose at decent people as he rewarded his collaborators.

Bush interrupted Saddam's staging of a comeback.

The Truman administration pulled our troops out of a politically, socially and militarily insecure South Korea by 1949 and sent troops back to Korea in 1950 when it was invaded.

30,000 Americans died in Korea in the remaining 30 months of Truman's presidency

[pissant]

We must not let the dems and the wobbly RINOs control the debate.

[Pinkbell]

I been recently arguing with Democraps over this. They honestly don't seem to care about that. They say their were no weapons of mass destruction so we have to leave. I will now give you a sample of ramblings from the left from posters I have been debating with:

Poster 1

"You are too stupid to put 1+1 together. Some how you caculate 3. Think for yourself do not let other people do it for you.

THERE WERE NO FUCHING WMD'S NEVER WAS NEVER WILL BE. IT IS ABSLOUTLEY LUDICRAS TO THINK SADAAM WOULD EVER HAVE WEAPONS TO COMPETE WITH OUT MILITARY. IN FACT THE ONLY THING THEY COULD EVER HAVE IS A WW2 STYLE NUKE AND THEY ARE STILL 10-15 YEARS AWAY FROM THAT. IRAN IS FAR CLOSER THAN SADAAM EVER WAS.

BTW, YOU SAID WE MUST "WIN"IN IRAQ? PLEASE DESCRIBE WHAT WININNG IN IRAQ WOULD BE.

WTF IS THERE TO WIN? THE MINDS AND HEARTS OF MUSLIM EXTREMISTS? WE COULD BE IN IRAQ 15 YEARS AND STILL NOT WIN. IT SURE THE HELL IS NO WHERE NEAR WININNG.

IRAQ IS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE MIDDLE EAST YOU PEOPLE SEEM TO THINK IRAQ'S NEIGHBORS ARE GOING TO LET US WIN. AL QUIEDA WAS NOT IN IRAQ, BEFORE WE CAME NOW THEY ARE. WHY BECUASE THE REST OF THE MIDDLE EAST IS NOT GOING TO LET US WIN.

IT BOGGLES MY MIND HOW SOME OF THE PEOPLE ON THE RIGHT WILL JUST DISCREDIT FACTS THAT THEY DO NOT WANT TO BELIEVE. YOU PEOPLE LIVE IN A WORLD YOU CREATE. I LOOK AT BOTH SIDES AND THEN DECIDE FOR MYSELF. You idiots will bash the liberal media in this country and not realize that media has gone to hell in this county it is more of a busniess than it ever has been news and fact are secondary. If we had real media that reported reality the war in Iraq would be over by now."

Part 2 of another Libs Post

"B) We cannot win in Iraq. At this point, our military and our politicians (even GWB) all understand that winning in Iraq is probably not possible without more active roles being played by Iraqi lawmakers.

The key at this point is for the government of Iraq to represent ALL of Iraq. And it doesn't. The police force, sure, we can train them up and give them cars and guns. And maybe they'll do a good job, maybe they won't. Maybe Iraq's upper and middle class will return from Jordan and Syria, maybe it won't.

But the government has done Jack **** the last three years. What have they done? They've passed a bad constitution, they've bickered a bit, one or two or ten of them has been assassinated. Whooptee-****ing-do.

Our servicemen, as well as soldiers from Britain and even ****ing Japan, have done what they were told to do since the end of official military action: they have sacrificed themselves in an effort to stabilize a country that we shouldn't even have invaded in the first place. There were no WMDs, at least, nothing that posed a threat to the US. Everyone, Saddam Hussein included, knew we were vulnerable. If he were truly a threat to the US, he would definitely have done something. As it stands, he didn't because he wasn't.

But now our men and women are there dying in the sand and the suck for what? Why are they there? I mean, really? We've done all we can.

Our people have shown a willingness to sacrifice their time, their limbs, and their lives for a people who they don't even know, who speak a language most people will never speak, who live in a culture most of us will never understand.

Their government, the bunch of idiot ****wits, on the otherhand, hasn't shown a willingness to sacrifice a god damned thing. They'd bicker over what to order for pizza and get nothing done until they'd all starved to death.

THIS is the country we want victory in? THIS is the mess our Idiot in Chief has created?

**** Iraq. **** the Iraqis. We've done all we can to give them democracy. We've done all we can since the "war" ended to give them peace. They haven't done ****. Let them be the ones to bleed into the dust."

[attiladhun2]

That would just be fine with the Defeatocrats. Give them ammo for the coming election—see what Bush did?

[Chgogal]

I swear my neutered dog is more manly than most Dems. All I can say, with Republicans the Front is in Iraq, A-stan, Somalia, the Philippines, and the Horn of Africa. With Democrats, the Front is in New York and D.C. That will be my two liner through the November 2008 elections.

[SoldierDad]

You could include a number of RINO Repubs in your question as to when these idiots will wake up and understand early withdrawal of troops would be a disaster. It appears that quite a number of Repub Senators are so worried about keeping their jobs that they are now willing to go against the President on Iraq and the WOT. There’s no courage left in Washington D.C. these days.

[do the dhue]

Poster #1 needs to understand that Hussein never complied with International Law. He broke the "Cease Fire Agreement". We never signed a peace treaty and we were legally at war and Hussein was to comply with International Law. He did not work well with inspectors and he eve broke the cease fire agreement by firing upon our planes in the no fly zone. Also, liberals need to recognize that when we decided to uphold International Law, Khaddafy recognized it and gave us all of his WMDs. Saddam WMD compliance was not satisfactory. It is not our fault he would not comply with an International agreement. Also, I would say to poster #1 that he/she is not thinking for them self. The thinking is crazy left wing lunacy spewed by your favorite Hollywood actor. Winning is setting up a government who can protect herself from an outside threat and maintain the peace within. The war is over and has been won. We have not shot a Iraqi tank, uniformed soldier, or aircraft since the start of the war. We have removed the old leadership. We have held elections and new leadership is in charge of Iraq now. We have trained over 350,000 Iraqi Troops and many more Iraqi Policeman. We have rebuilt infrastructure and schools for these people. When you are at war you don't rebuild things, you destroy it. We have been rebuilding the country for some time. What we are dealing with is terrorist activity trying to gain power. This is the Right Fight. We want to fight Terrorist. If Iraq is a magnet for terrorist good, we can kill them there instead of them killing us here.

I would ask for proof that Al Qauda was not in Iraq. I can point to evidence that says some Al Quada members trained in Iraq. Prove to me that Al Quada was not in Iraq.

We can win in Iraq, but it takes resolve. If you walk around saying you can't win, then guess what? Losing becomes an option. If you recognize how hard our Troops have worked to rebuild a Country. To see how hard they have worked to train their people. If you would see that the enemy is putting pressure on the Iraqi people by saying, "the Americans won't be here for ever, we will. Do not Work with the Americans or we will kill you and your family." And recognize that when we lose our resolve, the Iraqi people who worked with the US will die at the hands of the terrorist. Get a back bone and stand with your Troops so their work and sacrifice will not be in vain. So the people of Iraq will have life, hope, and a future.

That is the way I see it and I would say that liberal conversation may be detrimental to ones health. You may want to read Ann Coulter book, how to speak to liberals" before engaging in conversation.

These things I say will not convince one liberal. They only see what they want.

[HungarianGypsy]

I have met one person who is against the war that is smart enough to realize that an early pull out is bad.

[SoldierDad]

Great examples of the lunacy of the liberal left in this country. Nowhere do these people consider the average Iraqi citizen or the fact that a fair percentage of Iraqi’s are Christian not Muslim. Nowhere do they take into consideration the numbers of Iraqi soldiers and police who are killed by terrorists while working to stabilize their own country. These people have no concept of what it takes to build a government almost from scratch, and do not know the history of our own country and the trials and tribulations faced in a young country without a large insurgency trying to destroy everything. Simple minded fools these people are.

[do the dhue]

HEAR HEAR

That is a good one!

[rageaholic]

uh, so? irak was a mess before we got there.

[do the dhue]

That is true to. RINO are Demorats, they just borrowed our name. We need to remove the cowards. I don't care which Party they affiliate themselves with.

We debated the war before we went. We will debate it when it is over. But while Troops are still in harms way, show your resolve.

[SoldierDad]

It’s absolutely shameful that too many of our elected representatives are working harder for our enemies than they are for their own country. Were this the era of WWII all of them would be arrested, tried, and convicted of treason.

[do the dhue]

The below may be a cartoon, but this is the way I see the leaders of the Demoratic Party:

[ken21]

iran’s hatred of the united states was clear in 1979, if not earlier during the pavlivi regime.

surprise, surprise! not as the cia predicted, the iraqis did not greet the americans as “liberators”,

and bremer messed up by not including the republican guards in the new government, denying the sunni’s equal influence.

now, iran’s muscling into iraq.

whatta mess. “if you break it, you own it”—colin powell.

thanks, bush-boy, cheney, rumsfeld, tenet, franks, bremer, et al.