The celebrations in Iraq marking the pullback of U.S. combat forces from Baghdad and other cities stand in stark contrast to the reaction in the United States. Here the transfer of power has been met almost with public indifference, overshadowed by everything from Michael Jackson’s death to the fate of President Obama’s domestic agenda.

A year ago, in the heat of the presidential campaign, the issue of whether U.S. forces should stay or go produced pointed debate and disagreement between Obama and John McCain. Now, the transfer of authority for protecting the cities from U.S. to Iraqi forces has been greeted with near-universal acceptance — if also with some trepidation over what may happen next.
[...]
The pullback from the cities is not, technically, a withdrawal. The United States still has roughly 130,000 troops in Iraq and will for many months. The real drawdown will not begin in earnest until after the national elections in January 2010. But symbolically, yesterday’s handoff marks the beginning of a new and conclusive phase more than six years after U.S. forces invaded.

Public opinion long ago showed that a majority of Americans had concluded that the invasion ordered by President George W. Bush was a mistake. Bush’s troop increase, which he initiated in early 2007 in the face of much opposition, has been judged successful in contributing to a reduction in violence. But the Bush administration’s management of the war in the years between the invasion and the “surge” has been widely judged a failure.
[...]
Obama’s approval ratings on Iraq are among his highest on any issue he is dealing with. The decision to withdraw, on whatever timetable, the sharp reduction in American casualties and the general war-weariness after six years of involvement there have combined to create a political calm over the issue that so convulsed the country.

Yup. Things are getting back to normal with the world only being interested in Iraq for their oil.




  1. GetUsedToIt says:

    For those of you that think we will ever be completely out of Iraq, consider this: We still have bases and soldiers stationed in Germany…

  2. Jägermeister says:

    #21 – GetUsedToIt – We still have bases and soldiers stationed in Germany…

    And that’s just one country

  3. LDA says:

    #5 GigG

    Largely true.

    However the Japanese military may have to change it’s stance drastically due to the posture of America and it’s allies as it relates to China’s military (missile shields etc.) and the developments in the worlds biggest prison camp North Korea partially due to the help provided by, for example, the company Rumsfeld worked for between roles in the government..

    “Mr Rumsfeld was a non-executive director of ABB, a European engineering giant based in Zurich, when it won a $US200 million contract to provide the design and key components for the reactors. He sat on the board from 1990 to 2001, earning $US190,000 a year. He left to join the Bush Administration.” Sydney Morning Herald.

    The problem is not the (mostly honourable and brave) military or the government (which is really the people) but the crooks that get to make decisions for them (from both Mafia parties).

    I wish the world was simple and there was just right and wrong but it is not, therefore I am glad that men and women are willing to go to war to stop people like Saddam and I thank them for it. The world is better off without him.

  4. John Paradox says:

    # 5 GigG said,
    #1
    Japan’s military is able to be like it is because the US’s military is like it is.

    But they’re really good a fighting giant monsters
    :)
    J/P=?

  5. RTaylor says:

    The area will be fine. Persians and Arabs has so much love for one another.

  6. Rick Cain says:

    Well crap we coulda done this years ago.



Bad Behavior has blocked 25743 access attempts in the last 7 days.