Withdraw from Iraq? Not completely

Tom Curry National affairs writer • Profile • E-mail

WASHINGTON - The momentum in Congress seems to be shifting in favor of withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.

“The tide has turned,” said Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, Monday, as she called for the Senate to pass a measure requiring President Bush to begin a troop withdrawal.

“A growing number of Republicans... are now speaking against the failed strategy in Iraq, and that's good,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told reporters, referring to senators such as Snowe.

Reid said these Republicans “must put their words into action by voting with us to change course and responsibly end this war.”

But, as Reid reminded reporters Monday, when he says “responsibly end this war” he does not mean “withdraw all U.S. troops from Iraq.”

'Tens of thousands' could stay in Iraq
Reid noted that even the measure he co-sponsored with Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., calling on Bush to pull most troops out by next April would permit many soldiers to stay in Iraq.

“Understand even if you take (the) Feingold-Reid (proposal), Feingold-Reid called for American troops to remain in Iraq to do counterterrorism, to protect our assets in Iraq, to train the Iraqis,” Reid explained. “There's estimates that that would still leave tens of thousands of troops in Iraq.”

He also said, “No one is calling for a precipitous withdrawal in Iraq.”

But the crux of the debate in Congress and among presidential contenders is not precipitous withdrawal versus gradual withdrawal; instead it is total withdrawal versus a strategy that would leave thousands of U.S. troops there.

Assessment after tenth trip to Iraq
Just back from his tenth trip to Iraq, Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., stressed Monday that some U.S. troops could remain safely in bases in Kurdistan and western Iraq.

“Most of the major players (in Iraq) recognize the value of an American presence  they might disagree about size,” he said. “I think across sectarian lines, there is a feeling that the training of an appropriately professional military force is in their self-interest.”

The Rhode Island Democrat, a member of the Armed Services Committee and an Army veteran, said “I think also there is a concern that a total withdrawal of American forces very quickly would inject so much uncertainty in the situation that they’d be better off with some type of presence.”

Print this Email this Blog this  IM this

MORE FROM POLITICS

Politics Section Front

Why the Iraq funding bill was rejected by House   Russert: GOP issue is Obama's experience Newsweek: Want women's vote? Don't call them 'sweetie' McCain: U.S. can win Iraq war within 4 years Lawmakers say close to housing rescue deal NYT: After ruling, gay marriage again an issue? Mercurio: Turning a mountain into a molehill Edwards endorsement pays off for Obama Congress passes farm bill, defying Bush Obama blasts Bush over 'Nazi' comments Politics Section Front   Add Politics headlines to your news reader: