Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Campfire Soapbox. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Watch For Bush To Pull Out Of Iraq
Topic Started: Nov 10 2004, 11:25 AM (35 Views)
sylley2000
Member Avatar
Sylvia, Grand Bend ON
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/Art...USH10/TPComment

By EDWARD LUTTWAK
Wednesday, November 10, 2004 -

When presidents are re-elected and, therefore, no longer face re-election, they are free to pursue their own ambitions, and to do the wildest things. Their defeated opponents are quick to list the disasters to come.

For Ronald Reagan's second term, it was to be a much harsher policy toward the Soviet Union ("the evil empire") and an accelerated arms race (Star Wars). For Bill Clinton's second term, it was an even more passive foreign policy than the first, when the United States did nothing about Bosnia.

For George W. Bush's second term, it is supposed to be the reconquest of all of Iraq by street fighting through one Sunni town after another starting with Fallujah, a military attack on Iran or at least air attacks against Iran's nuclear facilities, and maximum pressure on North Korea.

Actually, re-elected presidents tend to do the opposite of what they did in their first term because, starting from the liberal left or the right, they tend to converge toward centrist, mainstream policies. Thus, Mr. Reagan did not accelerate the arms race but, instead, welcomed Mikhail Gorbachev's arrival to start a new kind of detente. And Mr. Clinton went from foreign policy neglect to full engagement in the Israel-Palestinian conflict, and waged war in Bosnia and Kosovo.

Now Mr. Bush will surprise his opponents by disengaging from Iraq, by favouring diplomatic means to stop Iran's progress toward nuclear weapons, and by working to repair relations with European allies antagonized by U.S. unilateralism.

The second Bush administration must withdraw troops from Iraq rather than increase their numbers simply because it has no other choice. With the U.S. Army numbering 502,000, plus 131,000 reservists recalled to active duty, and with 171,000 in the Marine Corps, the U.S. has fewer active-duty ground forces than at any time since 1939.

Of the 800,000 total, some 600,000 are in the command, training, procurement and logistics overhead, leaving roughly 200,000 in combat formations, i.e., divisions and independent brigades. They, in turn, also contain headquarters and combat-support elements, so the "rifle strength" most relevant for occupation duties is not more than 100,000. More than half that is now in Iraq within a total occupation force of 130,000, leaving fewer than 50,000 combat soldiers for duties worldwide, including combat operations in Afghanistan, the Korea garrison, residual base units around the world, and a very small strategic reserve. Even that mostly consists of units rotated out of Iraq.

In theory, the Bush administration could mobilize more National Guard and Army Reserve troops (only 131,000 are already mobilized -- with significant numbers in Iraq -- out of the combined total of 550,000).

But the mobilization of more National Guard and Army Reserve units would require a considerable training effort to prepare them for operations in Iraq, because the more combat-ready reservists are already mobilized. Such training requires months; thus the troops would not arrive until well after Iraq's scheduled January election.

In theory also, the Bush administration could enlist more troops, reversing its military policy, which has reduced troop levels to add advanced equipment. But that, too, is unlikely.

So what is likely is a strategic disengagement. But first Fallujah and other refuges of the insurgency must be cleaned up. And Iraq must have its January election to have the first elected government in the history of Iraq.

Edward Luttwak is a senior fellow at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
« Previous Topic · Soapbox · Next Topic »
Add Reply