Troops home from Iraq by end of year

[Jamie_B]

[url="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44990594/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/#.TqHg8t4g_lY"]http://www.msnbc.msn...a/#.TqHg8t4g_lY[/url]

[quote][b] Obama: All US troops out of Iraq by end of year[/b]


[b] ‘Today I can say that troops in Iraq will be home for the holidays,’ president says[/b]


[size=4][url="http://www.bing.com/maps/?v=2&where1=WASHINGTON&sty=h&form=msdate"]WASHINGTON[/url] — [/size]President Barack Obama on Friday declared an end to the Iraq war, one of the longest and most divisive conflicts in U.S. history, announcing that all U.S. troops would be withdrawn from the country by year's end.


“As promised the rest of our troops in Iraq will come home by the end of the year. After nearly nine years, America's war in Iraq will be over,” [url="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44990594/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/#"]Obama</span>[/url] said.
[url="http://fieldnotes.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/10/21/8432328-live-vote-was-the-iraq-war-worth-the-human-and-financial-cost"]Live vote: Was Iraq war worth the human, financial costs?[/url]

"Today I can say that troops in Iraq will be home for the holidays."
[indent=1]
[img]http://msnbcmedia4.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/111021-troops-hmed-930a.grid-5x2.jpg[/img]
[/indent][right][size=2]Mohammed Ameen[/size] / [size=2]Reuters[/size]

[color=#828282][size=2][b]U.S. soldiers take a rest in the shade of armoured vehicles at a courtyard at Camp Liberty in Baghdad. U.S troops are scheduled to pull out of the country by the end of this year, according to President Barack Obama.[/b][/size][/color]


[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1]The president made the announcement at a White House briefing following a private video conference with Iraqi Prime Minister [url="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44990594/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/#"]Nouri</span> </span>al</span>-</span>Maliki</span>[/url]. Obama said the two were in full agreement about how to move forward.[/size][/font][/size][/color]



[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1]The withdrawal of American troops marks a major milestone in the war that started in 2003 and resulted in the removal of Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq. More than 4,400 American military members have been killed, and another 2,000 wounded since the U.S. invasion.[/size][/font][/size][/color]

[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1]"Over the next two months, our troops in Iraq, tens of thousands of them, will pack up their gear and board convoys for the journey home,'' Obama said.[/size][/font][/size][/color]
[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1][url="http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/10/21/8433344-republicans-criticize-obama-over-iraq-withdrawal"]Republicans criticize Obama over Iraq withdrawal[/url][/size][/font][/size][/color]

[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1]"The last American soldier will cross the border out of Iraq with their heads held high, proud of their success, and knowing that the American people stand united in our support for our troops,'' Obama said. "That is how America's military efforts in Iraq will end.''[/size][/font][/size][/color]

[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1]The U.S. military role in Iraq has been mostly reduced to advising the security forces in a country where levels of violence had declined sharply from a peak of sectarian strife in 2006-2007, but attacks remain a daily occurrence.[/size][/font][/size][/color]



[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1]The U.S. has been withdrawing about 520 military personnel every day in accordance with the mission set by Obama in early 2009, sources told NBC News.[/size][/font][/size][/color]

[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1]Denis McDonough, the White House's deputy national security adviser, said that in addition to the standard Marine security detail, the U.S. will also have 4,000 to 5,000 contractors to provide security for U.S. diplomats, including at the U.S. embassy in Baghdad and U.S. consulates in Basra and Erbil.[/size][/font][/size][/color]



[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1]The American withdrawal by the end of 2011 was sealed in a deal between the two countries when George W. Bush was president. Obama declared the end of the combat mission earlier this year. The main sticking point has been legal immunity for any U.S. forces that remain.[/size][/font][/size][/color]

[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1][b]Negotiations on troop status [/b][/size][/font][/size][/color]
[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1]In recent months, Washington had been discussing with Iraqi leaders the possibility of several thousand American troops remaining to continue training Iraqi security forces.[/size][/font][/size][/color]
[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1][color=#999999][size=3][url="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44990594/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/#slice-3"]Slideshow: US troops leave Iraq [/url](on this page)[/size][/color][/size][/font][/size][/color]

[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1]Throughout the discussions, Iraqi leaders refused to give U.S. troops immunity from prosecution in Iraqi courts, and the Americans refused to stay without that guarantee.[/size][/font][/size][/color]

[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1]Moreover, Iraq's leadership has been split on whether it wanted American forces to stay.[/size][/font][/size][/color]

[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1]Senior Iraqis say in private they would like a U.S. troop presence to keep the peace between Iraqi Arabs and Kurds in a dispute over who controls oil-rich areas in the north of Iraq.[/size][/font][/size][/color]
[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1][url="http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/10/21/8431848-end-of-war-in-iraq-is-major-promise-kept-for-obama"]Obama keeps campaign promise with Iraq[/url][/size][/font][/size][/color]

[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1]When the 2008 agreement requiring all U.S. forces to leave Iraq was passed, many U.S. officials assumed it would inevitably be renegotiated so that Americans could stay longer.[/size][/font][/size][/color]

[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1]The U.S. said repeatedly this year it would entertain an offer from the Iraqis to have a small force stay behind, and the Iraqis said they would like American military help. But as the year wore on and the number of American troops that Washington was suggesting could stay behind dropped, it became increasingly clear that a U.S. troop presence was not a sure thing.[/size][/font][/size][/color]

[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1]The issue of legal protection for the Americans was the deal-breaker.[/size][/font][/size][/color]

[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1]But administration officials said they feel confident that the Iraqi security forces are well prepared to take the lead in their country. McDonough said assessment after assessment of the preparedness of Iraqi forces concluded that "these guys are ready; these guys are capable; these guys are proven; importantly, they're proven because they've been tested in a lot of the kinds of threats that they're going to see going forward.[/size][/font][/size][/color]



[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1]"So we feel very good about that."[/size][/font][/size][/color]
[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1][color=#999999][size=3][url="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44990594/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/#slice-1"]Video: End of an era as US troops withdraw from Iraq [/url](on this page)[/size][/color][/size][/font][/size][/color]

[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1]Pulling troops out by the end of this year allows both al-Maliki and Obama to claim victory.[/size][/font][/size][/color]

[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1]Obama kept a campaign promise to end the war, and al-Maliki will have ended the American presence and restored Iraqi sovereignty.[/size][/font][/size][/color]

[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1]The president used the war statement to once again turn attention back to the economy, the domestic concern that is expected to determine whether he wins re-election next year.[/size][/font][/size][/color]

[color=#828282][size=2][font=Georgia, Times, serif][size=1]"After a decade of war the nation that we need to build and the nation that we will build is our own, an America that sees its economic strength restored just as we've restored our leadership around the globe."[/size][/font][/size][/color][/quote]

[/right]

[CincyInDC]

Does the fine print include exceptions?

[sois]

What would happen if all troops were called back from all wars? What would they do? Be fired?

[Ben]

Go after the lazy bums at Occupy Wallstreet

[quote name='sois' timestamp='1319236184' post='1049661']
What would happen if all troops were called back from all wars? What would they do? Be fired?
[/quote]

[oldschooler]

Are we bringing all their oil home too?

[Jim Finklestein]

[quote]

[b] [url="http://thinkprogress.org/security/2011/10/21/350368/iraq-by-the-numbers-the-worlds-costliest-cakewalk/"]Iraq By The Numbers: The World’s Costliest Cakewalk[/url][/b]
[color=#666666]
By [url="http://thinkprogress.org/author/eclifton/"]Eli Clifton[/url] on Oct 21, 2011 at 5:00 pm[/color]



The Obama administration’s announcement of a withdrawal of all U.S. forces from Iraq by the end of the year offers the possibility of a definitive conclusion for the U.S. military’s involvement in Iraq. But while the return of all U.S. service men and women by Christmas is a cause for celebration, the costs of the war are only beginning to be fully understood. The “cakewalk” to Baghdad, as George W. Bush adviser[url="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Adelman_Kenneth"]Kenneth Adelman[/url] infamously wrote in February, 2002, has been anything but. The Iraq War, and the faulty premise that Saddam Hussein was developing weapons of mass destruction, has had a staggering humanitarian and economic cost.

Here are some relevant numbers:[indent]
[b]8 years, 260 days[/b] since Secretary of State Colin Powell presented evidence of Saddam Hussein’s biological weapons program
[b]8 years, 215 days[/b] since the March 20, 2003 invasion of Iraq
[b]8 years, 175 days[/b] since President George W. Bush’s “Mission Accomplished” speech on the USS Abraham Lincoln
[b]4,479 [/b][url="http://icasualties.org/Iraq/index.aspx"]U.S. military fatalities[/url]
[b]30,182[/b] [url="http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iraq_casualties.htm"]U.S. military injuries[/url]
[b]468[/b] [url="http://icasualties.org/iraq/contractors.aspx"]contractor fatalities[/url]
[b]103,142 – 112,708[/b] documented [url="http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/"]civilian deaths[/url]
[b]2.8 million[/b] [url="http://www.internal-displacement.org/countries/iraq"]internally displaced Iraqis[/url]
[b]$806 billion[/b] in [url="http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33110.pdf"]federal funding for the Iraq War[/url] through FY2011
[b]$3 – $5 trillion[/b] in [url="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/apr/06/3trillionmaybetoolow"]total economic cost to the United States[/url] of the Iraq war according to economist Joseph E. Stiglitz and Linda J. Blimes
[b]$60 billion[/b] in U.S. expenditures lost to [url="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/30/military-spending-waste_n_942723.html"]waste and fraud[/url] in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2001[/indent]
[b]0[/b] weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq
[/quote]

[url="http://thinkprogress.org/security/2011/10/21/350368/iraq-by-the-numbers-the-worlds-costliest-cakewalk/"]http://thinkprogress.org/security/2011/10/21/350368/iraq-by-the-numbers-the-worlds-costliest-cakewalk/[/url]

[sois]

[quote name='oldschooler' timestamp='1319291463' post='1049788']
Are we bringing all their oil home too?
[/quote]

Yes please liberate that oppressed oil.

[Jim Finklestein]

No. Actually Russia and China are getting the oil.

[quote]
[b] How Russia And China Got Those Iraqi Oil Fields[/b]


[size=1]

[color=#5C5C5C][font=arial, sans-serif]DEC 22 2009, 11:00 AM ET[/font][/color]
[/size]
[size=3]
There's been much scratching of heads over how U.S. oil companies managed to [url="http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1948787,00.html?"]win exactly 0%[/url] of the Iraqi field contracts recently up for bid. The contracts, based in Iraq's oil-heavy south, are extremely lucrative. The great American liberators were beat out primarily by China and Russia for the contracts. How did we lose the bids? Quite simply, we mistook the Iraqi oil fields as Iraqi. If we wanted them, we should have talked to Iran instead. The southern Iraqi oil fields, after all, belong to Tehran. From Robert Baer's 2008 book on Iran, [i]The Devil We Know[/i]:

[indent]The city of Basra offers Iraq's only maritime access and its main oil export route. A half-million barrels of oil a day pass through Basra, heading to offshore oil terminals in the Gulf. Iraq's Shia-dominated south produced 1.9 million barrels a day, accounting for the bulk of the country's production. The south also possesses 71 percent of Iraq's proven oil reserves, and accounts for 95 percent of Iraq's government revenues. Basra is the beating heart of Iraq's economy.

Yet Basra and its surrounding area are not really part of Iraq anymore. Quietly, without firing a single shot, the Iranians have effectively annexed the entire south, fully one-third of Iraq. In Basra today, the preferred currency is the Iranian rial. The Iraqi police, the military, and at least one of its intelligence services answers not to Baghdad, but to the Iranian-backed political parties, SCIRI, Da'wa, and other Shia groups under Tehran's control. But it's not just the police; the same Iranian proxies run the universities, the hospitals, and the social welfare organizations. They exert more control over daily life in Basra than the central government does -- and clearly more than Britain or the United States.

Iran supplies Basra with refined fuel and nearly every other raw commodity that keeps the city alive. An Iranian-allied faction is in charge of Iraq's oil exports, siphoning off hundreds of thousands of barrels a day to support the faction and its sponsors in Iran. Iran takes a direct role in reviewing lists of foreign companies bidding on Iraq's mega oil fields in the south. In other words, you can't do business in southern Iraq without a green light from Tehran. And no one even bothers to hide Iran's role.

Iraq's Shia oil minister was quoted in the Iranian press as saying there was an agreement between Iran and Iraq to jointly invest in Iraq's oil fields.[/indent]Baer goes on with pages of evidence. For example, Iraqi Da'wa spent 25 years in "exile" in Iran until, in January 2005, it hopped across the border and promptly won 38 of Basra's 41 Parliamentary seats. As it turns out, Iran even recently [url="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126114921937697207.html?mod=fox_australian"]occupied one of Iraq's fields[/url]. Tellingly, they did it with "10 to 11 Iranian troops," which doesn't exactly imply massive resistance from the Iraqis.

But this would be little more than speculation if nor for the fact that Russia and China walked away with the rights to the Iraqi fields. In September, [url="http://www.theatlanticwire.com/opinions/view/opinion/Secret-Iran-Nuclear-Programs-May-Align-World-Powers-Against-Proliferation-1138"]revelations[/url] of Iran's accelerated nuclear program brought international rebuke, but the United Nations Security Council has failed to act on the massive multilateral sanctions required to really deter Iran. Why has it failed? Both China and Russia, which have veto power on the Security Council, have consistently signaled that they would block sanctions.
It was less than three months ago that Russia and China defended Iran from sanctions that could have crippled its economy. Now they've both beat out the world's largest private oil companies to secure wildly lucrative deals in the south of Iraq, a region where Iran appears to exercise strict economic and political influence. Unless we can find a way to get along with Iran, we can probably expect for the free market economies of the West to have less and less access to the world's most important resource.
[/quote]

[url="http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2009/12/how-russia-and-china-got-those-iraqi-oil-fields/32445/"]http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2009/12/how-russia-and-china-got-those-iraqi-oil-fields/32445/[/url][/size]

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='oldschooler' timestamp='1319291463' post='1049788']
Are we bringing all their oil home too?
[/quote]


I'm sure that will happen in some indirect way.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='Jim Finklestein' timestamp='1319296117' post='1049803']
No. Actually Russia and China are getting the oil.



[url="http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2009/12/how-russia-and-china-got-those-iraqi-oil-fields/32445/"]http://www.theatlant...l-fields/32445/[/url][/size]
[/quote]


Wont be at all shocked if we work out some sort of deal to get some of it. Perhaps some trade deal where we send jobs to China in exchange for the oil.

[Jim Finklestein]

I doubt it, Jamie. For one, the US is already happy to send jobs to China without China giving up anything. For another, China is relatively poor when it comes to oil production. They depend on Russia and Iran (and now Iraq) to fuel the monster that is China's economy.

[Jamie_B]

So I guess this means we found the WMD's then?

[Jim Finklestein]

Oh and NATO will be the benefactors of the Libyan oil, especially Italy.

I think the US is counting on the oil sands here in Canada for their oil unfortunately. (Well good for our economy, bad for the environment since oil sands oil is notoriously dirty)

[Jim Finklestein]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1319298205' post='1049816']
So I guess this means we found the WMD's then?
[/quote]

[oldschooler]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1319298205' post='1049816']
So I guess this means we found the WMD's then?
[/quote]



Won't find those until we invade Syria. Which should be any day now.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='oldschooler' timestamp='1319298826' post='1049822']




Won't find those until we invade Syria. Which should be any day now.
[/quote]

Riiiiiight.

[oldschooler]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1319299178' post='1049826']
Riiiiiight.
[/quote]



Glad to see we agggggree.

[Jamie_B]

is that were doing?

[BengalLady]

i will believe it when i see it.

[Jamie_B]

Same BP that fucked the gulf so badly...

[url="http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2009/06/200963093615637434.html"]http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2009/06/200963093615637434.html[/url]

[quote] BP group wins Iraq oil contract
[b]
BP and CNPC accept contract as global firms race to gain access to untapped reserves.[/b]



[color=#000000][font=Arial][size=3][left]
An oil consortium led by British Petroleum has won a contract to develop a large oil field in Iraq, as dozens of international firms compete for the rights to the nation's oil and gas reserves.
BP, along with China's CNPC, secured the contract for the Rumaila oil field on Tuesday, the largest of Iraq's six oil fields on offer to foreign and state-owned companies.[/left][/size][/font][/color][/left][color=#000000][font=Arial][size=3][left]
The contract race is the first opportunity for global energy giants to gain a hold in the country since the Baath party nationalised the Iraq Petroleum Company in 1972, seven years before former president Saddam Hussein took power.
The Rumaila field is estimated to hold 3.3 trillion cubic feet of oil reserves, but also lies in Diyala province, which has seen some of Iraq's worst violence in recent years.
[b]Security concerns[/b]

A total of 32 firms, including US and European giants ExxonMobil and Shell and companies from China, India and other Asian states, are chasing the opportunity to get 20-year service contracts to develop six giant oil fields and two gas fields.

Three fields were offered by midmorning on Tuesday but only one deal was struck, as several foreign companies rejected the terms laid down by the government.

Nuri al-Maliki, Iraq's prime minister, has sought to address company concerns over poor security damaging business prospects and that contracts could be voided by future governments.
He said that the government would "offer security protection, offer all guarantees for their investments and offer all the facilities needed to ensure the success of this process".
But Mahmoud Almusafir, a former Iraqi diplomat, told Al Jazeera that there were still questions over the transparency of oil contracts in the country.
He said: "This American propaganda [is] telling people that now Iraq is free to do whatever.
"But ... who is setting the price and who is controlling?
"Militias from Al Dawa party are controlling the country. They are under the American umbrella; the American occupation," he said.

The country's oil industry has suffered from years of neglect and sanctions, and Iraq is hoping foreign investment will bring in the expertise to help raise production levels.
[b]'Benefits for Iraqis'[/b]

Oil Minister Hussein al-Shahristani told Iraqi public television: "Our principal objective is to increase our oil production from 2.4 million barrels per day to more than four million in the next five years."
He said increasing production to that level would push an extra $1.7tn into government coffers over the next 20 years.
Shahristani has said $30bn of the sum would go to the companies that extract the oil and the rest "would finance infrastructure projects across Iraq - schools, roads, airports, housing, hospitals".
The oil deposits, holding known reserves of 43 billion barrels of crude, are in southern and northern Iraq while the gas concessions are west and northeast of Baghdad.

Companies awarded deals will have to partner with Iraqi government-owned firms, principally the South Oil Company (SOC), and share management of the fields despite fully financing their development.

They will be paid a fixed fee per barrel, not a share of profits and the fee will only be paid once a production threshold set by the government is reached.

"This raises the question of the profitability of the contract," a source involved in the bidding told the AFP news agency.

"The companies are the ones investing, but have a big problem with the fact that management will be shared," the source said.
[/left][/size][/font][/color][/left][/quote][color=#000000][font=Arial][size=3][/size][/font][/color][/left]

[Marvin]

The powers that be have been positioning our country to engage Iran for a while now. The thwarted plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador only serves to move that agenda forward.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='Marvin' timestamp='1319900840' post='1052288']
The powers that be have been positioning our country to engage Iran for a while now. The thwarted plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador only serves to move that agenda forward.
[/quote]


Yep.