TIMELINE-Invasion, surge and withdrawal; U.S. forces in Iraq

Al-Maliki and Allawi serve US interests!
Adnan Darwash, Iraq Occupation Times

Al-Maliki and Allawi entered Baghdad on American tanks in 2003.
While Prime Minister, Al-Maliki signed the security agreement with the US while fighting and killing the Shiite followers of Al-Sadr in 2009. Similarly, Dr Allawi massacred people in Fallujah while being the interim-Iraqi Prime minister in 2004. By his admission, Dr Allawi has worked for British MI-6, American CIA and Saudi intelligence Services. Neither Al-Maliki nor Allawi works for the interests of Iraq. They have made enough money and will eventually leave Iraq with their American masters.


Unfortunately, violence is the only language the USraelis will listen too in order to end a military occupations. Germany, South Korea and Japan are still being occupied by US forces despite over 50 years since the end of respective wars.

In the West Bank, the Israelis are defying UN resolutions and remain occupying large parts of former Palestine. That is because there is no effective armed resistance that can drive them away. To the opposite, the Americans were forced on leaving Vietnam clinging to helicopters while under fire from the Vietcong. Similarly, the Palestinians in Gaza made it too costly for the Israeli IDF and to the Jewish settlers before deciding on packing up and leaving. Unaware of these facts, the Americans want to remain in Iraq as long as they have been occupying Germany, South Korea or Japan. But Iraqis are not Germans or Japanese. They will fight tooth and nail until the last uncivilised American cowboy and the last criminal mercenary packs up and leave.

Obama's talks of withdrawing US combat troops proved to be a lie as the American soldiers are still fighting in a number of areas in Iraq albeit in collaboration with Iraqi security forces allied to them. The Iraqi people and the American administration are testing each other. The Americans are hoping that the Iraqis will be fooled and buy their ploy of leaving, while the Iraqis are keeping their best and most bloody fight if the Americans don’t pack up and leave completely as promised; along with their mercenaries, stooges, agents, dirty work squads and intelligence service officers.

Americans are leaving but no Iraqi is impressed!

On August 19, 2010 the ‘last’ American combat unit sneaked under the cover of darkness out of Iraq into Kuwait. The soldiers were happy to be out of the Iraqi hell where everyone was considered as dangerous that must be shot if he/she came too close for comfort. Most American commanders knew that the war on Iraq was illegal as it was neither launched in self defense nor authorized by the UN Security Council; which means they may be called to testify about atrocities committed in any future war crimes tribunals. During August where the temperature soars to 51 degrees Celsius and with chronic shortages in electricity and water most of the time, coupled with high food prices, and bloody violence, the last thing on the Iraqis’ mind was to care about how many American savages have left the country or remained to continue their mission of destroying Iraq and the killing of its people on behalf of Israel. Some Iraqis feel very sorry that these have escaped and were allowed to leave alive and not to join the 4441 Americans who died or the 35000 who were disfigured or disabled for life. Furthermore, Iraq is still without a government as those corrupt Iraqis who were living on foreign intelligence donations, the likes of Dr Allawi, Dr Al-Chalabi, Al-Talibani, Al-Hashemi, Al-Maliki and Al-Barzani are still quarrelling about who should be Iraq next Prime minister, some five months after the parliamentary elections of March 7, 2010; into which all US-selected parties have lost. As an example Dr Allawi, Al-Maliki and the Kurdish parties have won 28%, 27.38% and 17.5% of the votes respectively.
The Saudis and the Americans want a major role for their agent Dr Allawi, who served as Iraq interim prime minister and who supervised the massacres in Fallujah in 2004 with the American help.


As a former Saddam right hand man in charge of Hanin secret organisation, Dr Allawi is strongly supported by pro-American elements of the Baathist party with a Sunni Majority. And because of Al-Maliki massacres against Al-Sadar Shiite followers in Kerbala, Baghdad and Basrah, in collaboration with the American forces, the Sadr movement flatly rejects Al-Maliki for a second term. To add insult to injury, the pro-American Kurdish minority with 17.5% of the vote wants a lion share of the Iraqi government and the country resources.

It is easy to compare Iraq current situation to a delayed gestation where the new born will be too big for a natural delivery and requires a Cesarean section. The new Iraqi government will be born headed by criminals and with tons of problems that neither the Americans nor Iraqi Neighbors interference can save them from the rage of the Iraqis.

The crimes committed in Iraq will haunt them!


The Western World have to admit that the Iraqi/PAKAFG resistance is stronger now than ever largely due to the crimes of the US savages and their mercenaries and because of the corrupt Iraqis collected by the CIA and sent on US tanks to rule the country. It would have been much better if the Americans have taken along all their stooges who betrayed Iraq as they will be massacred in due course.


Note: After seven a half year of US heavy military presence no American soldier can sit down in a cafe and enjoy a drink as the Iraqis will fill him with lead. Iraqis have a long memory and revenge is a second religion to them.


Everyday we get new political stories!


The Shiite of Iraq consitute 60% of the population and 90% of the Arabs. There are Shiite Kurds and Turkomen too. In a Western-style free democracy the Shiites should be easily able to form a government. But their role was reduced to 30% by Paul Bremer. As an example: the presidency is made of of a Sunni Kurd (Talibani) and two vice presidents; one Arab Shiite (Dr Adil Abdul Mehdi) and a Sunni Arab (Tarek Al-Hashemi). In other words the sunnis have 60% of the power. Similarly the Prime Minister, a Shiite Al-Maliki has two vice premiers one sunni Arab and another a Sunni Kurd.

The Kurds with 17% of the population have the presidency, one vice premier, the foreign ministry, minister of water resources and commander in Chief of the armed forces. So the Kurdish minority is taking a lion share with USraeli support. Despite all this, the Sunni Saudis were unhappy with Al-Maliki and want Dr Allawi.

The Americans want the security be handled by Dr Allawi since he has been running an Iraqi version of the CIA and hope to take over the government by force, someday.
The above facts are the main cause of instability in the country. Allawi, Al-Maliki and Al-Sadr don't want the Kurdish minority to control the country, but can't say it openly in order not to upset the USraelis.
In this regard, Al-Sadr movement is the only political force that calls for the total liberation of Iraq from the boots of foreign soldiers and is in total disagreement with Al-Maliki.

Adnan Darwash, Iraq Occupation Times


19 Aug 2010 09:37:39 GMT
Source: Reuters
Aug 19 (Reuters) - The United States is on track to draw down its forces in Iraq to 50,000 by Aug. 31, but there are doubts President Barack Obama can fulfil his pledge to withdraw all U.S. troops by the end of 2011.

The 50,000 remaining will train Iraqi armed forces and police units.

Here is a timeline on U.S. forces in Iraq since 2003:

March 20, 2003 - U.S.-led forces invade Iraq from Kuwait to oust Saddam Hussein.

-- About 125,000 U.S. and British soldiers and Marines are in Iraq. By the end of April, U.S. says it will add 100,000 more soldiers to the U.S.-led invasion force.

April 9 - U.S. troops take Baghdad, Saddam disappears.

May 1 - President George W. Bush declares hostilities over.

-- Between March 20 and May 1, 138 U.S. troops are killed.

Dec. 13 - U.S. troops capture Saddam near Tikrit.

Feb. 22, 2006 - Bombing of Shi'ite shrine in Samarra sparks widespread sectarian slaughter, raising fears of civil war.

Feb. 14, 2007 - Maliki launches U.S.-backed crackdown in Baghdad aimed at pulling Iraq back from brink of civil war.

-- Five U.S. combat brigades plus supporting troops, or some 30,000 soldiers, are sent to Iraq between February and mid-June 2007. Besides reducing violence, Washington wanted to create "breathing space" for Iraqi leaders to make progress on laws seen as critical to fostering national reconciliation.

June 15 - U.S. military says it has completed its troop buildup, or "surge", to 160,000 soldiers.

-- From April to June 2007, 331 U.S. soldiers are killed, the deadliest quarter of the war for the U.S. military.

Sept. 10 - U.S. commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus, recommends cutting troops by more than 20,000 by mid-2008.

July 22, 2008 - The U.S. military says the last of five extra combat brigades sent to Iraq in 2007 have withdrawn, leaving just under 147,000 U.S. troops in Iraq.

Nov. 17, 2008 - Iraq and the United States sign an accord requiring Washington to withdraw its forces by the end of 2011. The pact gives the government authority over the U.S. mission for the first time, replacing a U.N. Security Council mandate. Parliament approves pact after negotiations 10 days later.

Jan. 1, 2009 - U.S.-Iraq security pact comes into force, placing 140,000 U.S. troops in Iraq under Iraqi authority.

Feb. 27 - New U.S. President Barack Obama announces plan to end U.S. combat operations in Iraq by Aug. 31, 2010, but says will leave up to 50,000 troops to train Iraqi forces.

June 30 - All U.S. combat units withdraw from Iraq's urban centres and redeploy to bases outside.

June, 4 2010 - U.S. military says there are 88,000 troops in Iraq.

Aug 18 - U.S. troop strength in Iraq is 56,000, a senior Obama administration official says.

-- The military says that there have been 4,419 U.S. military deaths since the invasion in 2003.

White House looking at Iraq withdrawal options

WASHINGTON, (AFP) – The White House is weighing several options for US troop withdrawals from Iraq, with timetables ranging from President Barack Obama's campaign pledge to remove all combat troops within 16 months to a 23-month option, a defense official said.

A 19-month scenario was also presented to the president by military advisers at the White House's request, the official told AFP on condition of anonymity, confirming an earlier report by US-based McClatchy Newspapers.

"We know they would like to do it in 16 months" but "we presented a range of options and the risks associated with it," said a second defense official, who also requested anonymity.

The newspaper group said the White House had received assessments of the risks associated with the 16, 19 and 23-month troop withdrawal options.

Obama warned in late January that he would have to make "difficult decisions" on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, following his maiden meeting as commander-in-chief at the Pentagon with military brass.

During his first week in the White House, he asked top military commanders to draw up plans for a "responsible" military drawdown in Iraq, where there are currently 142,000 US troops.

US military commanders in Iraq worry that a precipitous withdrawal would threaten security gains as Iraqis go to the polls in a series of elections this year.

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has said that a 16-month drawdown was one of "various options" being evaluated, warning about a potential reversal in Iraq.

"Let me just say, I think our obligation is to give the president a range of options and the risks associated with each of those options," Gates said after meeting with Obama in late January. "And he will make the decision."

McClatchy Newspapers said Obama would likely announce his Iraq strategy by mid-March.

Obama is also preparing to send up to 30,000 US troops to Afghanistan, which he has called "the central front in our enduring struggle against terrorism and extremism."

Some 36,000 US troops, some part of a broader NATO force, fight a resurgent Taliban and Al-Qaeda there.

----------

Some US forces will face combat after Iraq pullout

By ANNE GEARAN, AP Military Writer Anne Gearan, Ap Military Writer – 2 hrs 56 mins ago


Officials: Most troops out of Iraq in 18 months Play Video AP – Officials: Most troops out of Iraq in 18 months



In this Sunday, Feb. 15, 2009 picture, U.S. soldiers stand guard after a road AP – …

WASHINGTON – Some of the U.S. forces likely to remain in Iraq after President Barack Obama fulfills his pledge to withdraw combat troops would still have a combat role fighting suspected terrorists, the Pentagon said Wednesday.

Obama plans to announce his withdrawal strategy as early as Friday. He will travel that day to Camp Lejeune in North Carolina, the White House announced Wednesday.

While there, Obama is expected to outline a compromise withdrawal plan that leaves behind as many as 50,000 troops for cleanup and protection operations.

"The president will thank the Marines and their families for their incredible sacrifice, and will outline his plan for a way forward in Iraq," said a senior administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity because the plan has not been announced.

Although most of the fighting forces would be withdrawn in the next 18 months, some troops could remain in Iraq for years to come. An agreement forged by the Bush administration with Iraqi officials requires removal of all U.S. forces by 2012.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said that a holdover, or "residual," force would number in the tens of thousands.

His spokesman said Wednesday that assuming there is such a force, it would have three primary functions: Training and helping Iraqi forces; protecting Americans and U.S. assets in Iraq and limited counterterrorism operations in which Iraqi forces would take the lead.

"I think a limited number of those that remain will conduct combat operations against terrorists, assisting Iraqi security forces," Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said. "By and large you're talking about people who we would classify as enablers, support troops."

Obama campaigned on ending the Iraq war, and pledged to do so in 16 months. The withdrawal timetable he is expected to approve would stretch over 19 months, counting from Inauguration Day. That means more than 100,000 troops would leave over the coming 18 months.

The pullout would free up troops and resources for the war in Afghanistan, where Obama has said the threat to national security remains high.

"We are now carefully reviewing our policies in both wars, and I will soon announce a way forward in Iraq that leaves Iraq to its people and responsibly ends this war," Obama said in his address to Congress on Tuesday.

Gates, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen and others met with Obama at the White House on Wednesday. There was no announcement afterward.

"The president has not made a final decision about our force structure in Iraq going forward," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs told reporters Wednesday. "I don't think it would be a surprise, though, to anybody in this room that the president since his first full day in office has been working toward a solution that would responsibly draw down our troops in Iraq."

Morrell said he anticipates an announcement this week.

The role and makeup of residual forces has been unclear throughout last year's negotiations between the United States and Iraq, and during Obama's planning for an exit strategy.

Plans became only slightly clearer Wednesday. Morrell said many troops would be long-term advisers in such areas as intelligence, or would help the Iraqi military fill in gaps in equipment such as helicopters.

Although he said Iraq would still be considered a "war zone," Morrell said most remaining forces would not do anything that resembles fighting.

"But just because these troops would carry a sidearm, as all U.S. troops do in theater, that should not be confused with them having a combat mission," Morrell said.

"For example, U.S. personnel assigned to the Ministry of Finance may have a sidearm," he said, "but I doubt they'd consider themselves a combat force, and certainly wouldn't be equipped in that fashion to perform combat operations."

___

Associated Press writer Ben Feller contributed to this report.


----------

SCENARIOS-Risks of speedier U.S. troop pullout from Iraq

27 Feb 2009 11:44:56 GMT
Source: Reuters
Feb 27 (Reuters) - The United States will pull combat troops out of Iraq by Aug. 31, 2010, faster than foreseen in a bilateral security pact and also faster than some U.S. military commanders on the ground had hoped.

A large residual force will remain for limited counter-terrorism operations and for training Iraqi troops in a bid to prevent a slide back into the sectarian violence that swept Iraq after the 2003 U.S.-led invasion.

The following are some potential implications of the speedier withdrawal:

POWER VACUUM

Many of the 140,000 U.S. troops now in Iraq have in the past year become more like peacemakers or police than a combat force.

In particular, U.S. forces say they have been instrumental in stemming conflict between Iraqi soldiers or police loyal to the Shi'ite Muslim-led government in Baghdad and Kurdish peshmerga fighters.

Towns near the border of the largely autonomous northern Kurdistan region are disputed by Kurds and the central government. They could become flashpoints for future conflict.

Some analysts fear that Iraqi forces and peshmerga will both try to fill the power vacuum that a U.S. pullout will leave in places like oil-rich Kirkuk. The results could be bloody.

There is also a question mark as to whether local security forces can eradicate lingering pockets of insurgency, such as in the ethnically mixed northern city of Mosul and elsewhere, where Sunni Islamist groups like al Qaeda are making a stand.

MINORITIES

Washington has been able to exert some political influence on the government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki simply because of its massive military presence in Iraq.

One area where U.S. officials say they have focused their efforts is to encourage the government to pay attention to the concerns and complaints of minority groups, such as Sunni Muslims who were dominant under Saddam Hussein.

When most of the U.S. soldiers have gone, Washington will be left with much less clout.

Some Sunni politicians are concerned that will allow Maliki, or whoever is in charge of the Iraqi government in August 2010, to ignore the demands of minority communities. That could lead to a resurgence in sectarian fighting.

WILL IRAQI FORCES BE READY?

Iraq's 600,000 police and soldiers have made tremendous strides in the past year, U.S. military officials say.

The peaceful nature of Jan. 31 provincial elections, which took place without a single major militant attack in the country, was a testament to their improving capabilities.

But the Iraqi security forces still lack what U.S. commanders call "combat enablers", such as logistics, air power, skilled mechanics and intelligence gathering and analysis.

It is possible that many of the 35,000-50,000 U.S. troops that will remain after August 2010 will fulfill some of those roles until the Iraqi army and police are fully able to support their own operations. (Writing by Michael Christie; Editing by Dominic Evans)

---------

Winding down the Iraq war will allow Obama to boost troop numbers in Afghanistan, which he has declared the central front in the U.S. fight against terrorism. He hopes it will also help him slash a ballooning $1.3 trillion budget deficit.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates said he would favor a modest U.S. military presence in Iraq even after the end of 2011 to assist Iraqi security forces if requested by Baghdad.

"My own view would be that we should be prepared to have some very modest-sized presence for training and helping them with their new equipment and providing perhaps intelligence support," he told reporters.

"We cannot sustain indefinitely a commitment that has put a strain on our military, and will cost the American people nearly a trillion dollars," he said.