The Scheme
Obama's decision to keep Defense Secretary Gates was followed immediately by the leak of a military plan to push back against a 16-month withdrawal plan. The scheme is to keep our combat troops in Iraqi cities after mid-2009, in defiance of the withdrawal agreement.
The New York Times has revealed that Pentagon planners are proposing the relabeling of combat units as training and support units. Reportedly, Pentagon planners are projecting that as many as 70,000 troops would be maintained in Iraq for a substantial time beyond 2011, despite an explicit agreement, which requires that all of our troops be withdrawn.
General Ray Odierno, the top US commander in Iraq told reporters that our troops would not move from numerous security posts in cities beyond next summer's, by saying "We believe that's part of our transition teams."
Odierno’s spokesman, Lt. Col. James Hutton, explained that these transition teams would consist of enablers rather than combat forces, and that this would be consistent with the withdrawal agreement. Odierno's and Hutton's remarks were based on the Pentagon plan for the relabeling combat forces as support forces in order to evade a key constraint in the agreement.
In an article in The New Republic, Eli Lake writes that three military sources told him that our military transition teams, who have been fighting alongside Iraqi units, as well as force-protection units and quick-reaction forces, are all being redesignated as support units, despite their obvious combat functions, in order to skirt the language of the Status of Forces Agreement.
According to the New York Times the question of whether Iraqis would permit relabeled combat forces to remain after next June was discussed with Obama. Despite Odierno's assertion that it’s our military's prerogative to unilaterally determine what troops may remain Iraqi cities, the Iraqi government has made it clear that our military has no such right.
On 12/11, a Washington Post column by George Will quoted Defense Secretary Gates as saying that there is bipartisan congressional support for a long-term residual presence of as many as 40,000 troops in Iraq, because for decades it has been the standard practice following major military operations.
Apparently, military commanders are making plans, behind the scenes to get Obama to consent to the subversion of the intent of the Status of Forces Agreement.
The New York Times has revealed that Pentagon planners are proposing the relabeling of combat units as training and support units. Reportedly, Pentagon planners are projecting that as many as 70,000 troops would be maintained in Iraq for a substantial time beyond 2011, despite an explicit agreement, which requires that all of our troops be withdrawn.
General Ray Odierno, the top US commander in Iraq told reporters that our troops would not move from numerous security posts in cities beyond next summer's, by saying "We believe that's part of our transition teams."
Odierno’s spokesman, Lt. Col. James Hutton, explained that these transition teams would consist of enablers rather than combat forces, and that this would be consistent with the withdrawal agreement. Odierno's and Hutton's remarks were based on the Pentagon plan for the relabeling combat forces as support forces in order to evade a key constraint in the agreement.
In an article in The New Republic, Eli Lake writes that three military sources told him that our military transition teams, who have been fighting alongside Iraqi units, as well as force-protection units and quick-reaction forces, are all being redesignated as support units, despite their obvious combat functions, in order to skirt the language of the Status of Forces Agreement.
According to the New York Times the question of whether Iraqis would permit relabeled combat forces to remain after next June was discussed with Obama. Despite Odierno's assertion that it’s our military's prerogative to unilaterally determine what troops may remain Iraqi cities, the Iraqi government has made it clear that our military has no such right.
On 12/11, a Washington Post column by George Will quoted Defense Secretary Gates as saying that there is bipartisan congressional support for a long-term residual presence of as many as 40,000 troops in Iraq, because for decades it has been the standard practice following major military operations.
Apparently, military commanders are making plans, behind the scenes to get Obama to consent to the subversion of the intent of the Status of Forces Agreement.
posted by Jim O'Leary | 1:20 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home