Iraqis want us out, says US general

[RickSp]

Iraqis want us out, says US general

The top US military commander admitted Sunday that Iraqis wanted US and other foreign troops to leave the country "as soon as possible", and said US troop levels in Iraq were now being re-assessed on a monthly basis. The admission by Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Marine General Peter Pace followed a decision by the Pentagon to reduce its presence in Iraq by two army brigades, which amounts to about 7000 soldiers. "Understandably, Iraqis themselves would prefer to have coalition forces leave their country as soon as possible," General Pace said in a Christmas Day interview on the Fox News Sunday show. "They don't want us to leave tomorrow, but they do want us to leave as soon as possible." Some US foreign policy experts have expressed concern that a new Iraqi government emerging from the December 15 parliamentary elections could ask American and other coalition troops to leave, but officials have dismissed that forecast as unrealistic. However, an opinion survey conducted in Iraq in October and November by ABC News and a pool of other US and foreign media outlets showed that despite some improvements in security and living standards, US military operations in the country were increasingly unpopular. Two-thirds of those polled said they opposed the presence of US and coalition forces in Iraq, up 14 points from a similar survey taken in February 2004. Nearly 60 per cent disapproved of the way the United States has operated in Iraq since the war began in March 2003, with most of those expressing "strong disapproval", the poll found.

It isn't surprising that the Iraqis want us out. That has been clear for quite some time. What is surprising is that the Head of the Joint Chiefs is even admitting it. Cheney and Rumsfeld must both be losing power if the generals start feeling free to tell the truth.

[Jack]

Ah, he's just some pussy who wants to aid the enemy by cutting and running when what we really need to do is bomb the entire region back to the stone age so they'll appreciate the glories of freedom we've bestowed upon them.

[Nono]

Yeah, where do they find these wimps anyway?

If -- after the Iraq balls-up, Katrina and all the other assorted bits of egg on Boy George's face -- he hasn't lost power, the situation is indeed desperate. Remember the fears prompted by a gin-soaked Nixon as his ship went down -- Might that wacko creep actually push The Button?
We'll see what sort of foreign crisis (or "crisis") Cheney can foment to galvanize the nation, and in particular those gutless slackers among the Joint Chiefs of Staff, behind the president and the flag. Syria? Iran? Venezuela? No wait -- Bolivia! We can't have democratically elected presidents of resource-rich countries right there in our backyard now can we?

So brace yourselves for The Bolivian Threat.

[tusaki]

I don't find it surprising at all. But I don't blame the coalition nor do I find it strange the top general said this. Anyone would like a foreign military force to leave their country a soon as possible. However, "as soon as possible" is key here. I hope the training and organizing of the Iraqi security forces and its government is coming along nicely.

What I find amusing is that you guys make it sound like anyone expected that a military occupation and operations are welcome anywhere. I think even the most fervent hawk will agree that military occupation, however noble the reason, is never really loved in the occupied country. In all examples of history, the liberators were kindly asked to leave after they were done liberating. However, the job is not done yet for the coalition troops. So should they leave as soon as possible? yes. "as soon as".

The main question is: does the continued military presence of the US contribute to or reduce the unrest and violence in Iraq? I can understand both sides of the argument. Hawks which claim that the US should stay because of the unrest, as well as doves who claim that the presence is the reason for the unrest in the first place. But I don't have an objective answer nor do I know of a way to test either hypothesis. Realistically, I think the US will stay as long as politically possible, and after they are finally gone we will find out. The funny part is, when the second hypothesis is true, the hawks can say they have done a good job :) And when (even if) they have done a good job, the doves can claim it was the military presence which caused the unrest because surely, there is none, now that the forces are gone... Here we go: spin spin spin

[Nono]

Quote by: tusaki I think even the most fervent hawk will agree that military occupation, however noble the reason, is never really loved in the occupied country.

Until recently the very suggestion that the Iraqis would like the US to leave -- whatever the stated reasons -- was held to be traiterous by the US government and media.
The neo-cons, Dubbya in the lead, assured us that the Iraqis would be prostrate with joy -- not just at their liberation from Saddam but at the events that would follow.

They weren't and they aren't, since they know very well that the real motivations of the occupiers are far removed from concern over their welfare and because they now find themselves in the midst of a civil war -- though it won't actually be called that by the media till the Americans leave. It shows every promise of being long and bloody.

In the meantime the Americans can't even guarantee the electricity supply. How pathetic.

[fushigi]

Actually, I don't think it's as matter-of-fact as all that. Not all countries ask for foreign troops to leave immediately. European countries were all too glad to have U.S. military bases vis-a-vis the Soviet threat, Japan was also happy to have the U.S. foot their security bill and use the savings to bolster their economy, and how many times have we heard Hamid Karzai ask for more, not less troops?

If Iraqi popular opinion is really that overwhelmingly against the U.S. troop presence, it's not a very strong endorsement for how the USAF is handling things. Especially considering how many lives Iraqi-on-Iraqi suicide bombings have taken since the occupation and the memory of the Sunni Baathists' bloody reign over a country that's 65% non-Sunni. Hell, if I was an Iraqi, I'd be wanting all the security I could get, no matter who provided it. But wanting the U.S. troops out? Anyone seen the movie Crash? Reminds me of the black lady stuck in her burning car refusing help from a white cop because she hated him so much.

[RickSp]

And the neocons still babble about how the "good news" about Iraq just isn't being covered by the media, excuse me make that the "liberal" media. (Of course it is too dangerous for most journalists to leave their heavily fortified hotels, but that is a detail the Bushbot cheerleaders seem to ignore.)

In the past, any general who told the truth about Iraq, from General Eric Shinseki who was forced into retirement after Shinseki questioned Rumsfeld's "cakewalk" scenario in Iraq to General Thomas White was fired as Secretary of the Army after he agreed with Shinseki. Speaking honestly was more dangerous than an IED to US flag officers. It will be interesting to see whether this statement by General Pace will be simply ignored by the US media or whether Pace will fly into a series of denials.

[Osborn F Enready]

I will just be happy to see the end of an illegal war.....ANOTHER illegal war.

(Brady Bunch dream sequence music que)

Now let us set to prosecute those who helped it happen, and investigate why.

(music fades, and I realize I was dreaming)

[tusaki]

It is true that there was a... patriotic period... but anyone with any access to a library should be able to tell that occupation forces are never really loved. Also, the Bush administration was talking about was about being "hailed" in like liberators. And they were. But that is different from being an occupation force as they are perceived now. It is a public secret that the pentagon never planned to stay this long.

To reply to fushigi: The US bases in Germany were there, yes. But (a) they were not considered an occupation force and (b) they were not loved although they were deemed necessary. There is a difference. I know of the basis in Japan and the controversy they generate every year. Never really pleasant...

[Logjam]

I have been a GI in Korea, Okinawa, Japan, and the Philippines. I was stationed on Okinawa (at Naha Naval Base) when we gave the Island back to the Japanese. The news was full of stories how much we were hated. They even had riots in South Korea.

I never saw any negativity whatsoever caused by our presence (except possibly at Hiroshima in early August; we were told to put the place off limits for two weeks or so.)

I was always treated well, and the folks seemed to enjoy our being there. I've also heard that the GI's are finding the Iraqis friendly and appreciative of our efforts to free them.

The media, of course will say something different. But what is and what the media wants it to be are two very different things.

[tusaki]

I agree with you to a certain point, Logjam. The media always wants controversy, because that sells. But the opposite is also true, the populace being loving and understanding of you will come to you. The rest will try to stay away. In Japan, there is talk about the closing of military basis every year. Not because they love you so much, nor because they really hate you. Do you understand?

[Logjam]

Quote by: Nono Yeah, where do they find these wimps anyway? If -- after the Iraq balls-up, Katrina and all the other assorted bits of egg on Boy George's face -- he hasn't lost power, the situation is indeed desperate.

Bull roar! The Katrina clean up is happening. We've paid billions to feed, house and educate the victims of the storm. I'm a little tired of it myself. Who says that we, the public, should insure all the poor people who happen to be victims of a storm?

As for the War in Iraq; it's working. We are fighting, and so is the enemy. We have killed about 30,000 of them, or about 15 to one. The enemy, however; is not rolling over and playing dead. They are fighting because they are encouraged by people like you. They know if you win, the country loses. So the terrorists are banking on you.

Wars are never easy. The Revolutionary War was considered by many impossible for us to win. It took eight years (1775 to 1783). You, Nono would have been a Tory. Certainly it'd be uncharastic of you to join the Patriots. You would have been a Copperhead durning the Civil War. You would have been a CO in both WWI and II. During Vietnam you would, of course, have sided with the Communist NVA.

You're a great patriot, Nono. With citizens like you who needs enemies?

[Matt W]

You're a great patriot, Nono. With citizens like you who needs enemies?

Once more, a ranter ignores the fact that people on here aren't all Americans. Nor would we want to be. :rolleyes:

We have killed about 30,000 of them, or about 15 to one.

I see you're not bothering to count Iraqi security force casualties or civilian dead? Of course not...why would you? They're not important.... :rolleyes:

[Logjam]

Quote by: tusaki I agree with you to a certain point, Logjam. The media always wants controversy, because that sells. But the opposite is also true, the populace being loving and understanding of you will come to you. The rest will try to stay away. In Japan, there is talk about the closing of military basis every year. Not because they love you so much, nor because they really hate you. Do you understand?

We have pulled out of much of Okinawa. I don't think that we have a plan to pull out of Japan. The Japanese want us there to beef up their defense.

As for the people who don't like us presenting themselves to us, well that may be correct in part. But many of us met Japanese in stores, on the trains and in the public baths. They did not make an effort to come up to us, we were just together, and we got along just fine.

I'll tell you though who is genuinely hated in South East Asia; it's the Japanese. The Philippinos and Koreans absolutely hate them. They haven't forgotten. At the end of WWII the Japanese expected us to behave to them as they had behaved to the Chinese. They were shocked when we treated them with understanding and affection.

We are a good, kind, and understanding people you see; and we are better than most.

[tusaki]

Quote by: LogJam As for the War in Iraq; it's working. We are fighting, and so is the enemy. We have killed about 30,000 of them, or about 15 to one. The enemy, however; is not rolling over and playing dead. They are fighting because they are encouraged by people like you. They know if you win, the country loses. So the terrorists are banking on you.

I don't think the enemy is really listening to the western world, so any influence by doves is neglicable. Terrorists don't kill more or less depending on how many war-critics will seize the stage. We need criticism to prevent Groupthink.

[tusaki]

Quote by: Logjam We have pulled out of much of Okinawa. I don't think that we have a plan to pull out of Japan. The Japanese want us there to beef up their defense. As for the people who don't like us presenting themselves to us, well that may be correct in part. But many of us met Japanese in stores, on the trains and in the public baths. They did not make an effort to come up to us, we were just together, and we got along just fine. I'll tell you though who is genuinely hated in South East Asia; it's the Japanese. The Philippinos and Koreans absolutely hate them. They haven't forgotten. At the end of WWII the Japanese expected us to behave to them as they had behaved to the Chinese. They were shocked when we treated them with understanding and affection. We are a good, kind, and understanding people you see; and we are better than most.

I will agree with you on that :) I will never claim that Americans are evil. Just that occupation forces in general are not really liked because they are... erh... occupation forces...

[Logjam]

Quote by: Matt W Once more, a ranter ignores the fact that people on here aren't all Americans. Nor would we want to be. :rolleyes: I see you're not bothering to count Iraqi security force casualties or civilian dead? Of course not...why would you? They're not important.... :rolleyes:

Your facts are wrong. We have not killed that many innocent civilians. Certainly not nearly as many as were murdered by Saddam. You do understand don't you that Saddam killed about a million of his people don't you? Those hundreds of thousands found in the mass graves weren't put there by us you know.

I am not ranting at all.

BTW: What are you guys going to do when the war's over and we've won? How are you going to twist it to your advantage?

You are a spinless liberal. You let brave Americans fight for your freedom, while you flip them the bird. You are less than a brave man, Matt. You are also a lousy American. Even if you disagree with the reasons that we go to war; any true American will support our fellow citizens while they are in battle.

You are supporting the enemy. That's beyond the pale. Doing so is despicable.

[tusaki]

And about the asians hating Japan. :( well.. the japanese haven't been angels (*cough*). (Actually, you should know that I'm not japanese myself, I just have an interest in the region.) And the hatred for them puzzles me. I know the chinese government uses anti-Japanse agitation for their own political gains.

[Logjam]

Quote by: tusaki I will agree with you on that :) I will never claim that Americans are evil. Just that occupation forces in general are not really liked because they are... erh... occupation forces...

Not in the case of Japan and Germany. In Japan we were their protective force against the Red Hords. In Germany we were providing their defense against the Soviets. I spent time in Germany and Austria. Many folks, especially in Austria thanked, me for my government's support. I met a lot of ex-Nazis in Austria (1975). One said to me, "In the next war we will fight the Russians together". :)

Our troops weren't always liked; to be sure. But, generally the countries that we were sent to protect appreciated what we did. In Germany they squeeled when we'd close an Air Force Base. They missed the money that our troops spent.

[Logjam]

Quote by: tusaki And about the asians hating Japan. :( well.. the japanese haven't been angels (*cough*). (Actually, you should know that I'm not japanese myself, I just have an interest in the region.) And the hatred for them puzzles me. I know the chinese government uses anti-Japanse agitation for their own political gains.

Yeah, have you noticed how badly the Chinese have been treating Japanese lately? Throwing rocks at their cars and embassies, etc..

The Japanese and Koreans were treated terribly by the Japanese in WWII and they remember it. Now, in their minds they are getting payback.