Withdraw from Iraq? Not completely

Cartoons

On Tuesday, Reed, along with Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., proposed an amendment to the defense authorization bill requiring a reduction in the number of U.S. forces in Iraq to begin within 120 days.

Reed and Levin want U.S. forces to shift to limited counterterrorism and training missions.

Their amendment does not specify the number of troops that would be withdrawn from Iraq. It simply says that by April 2008 Bush would need to make some reduction.

Story continues below ↓

"We don't want to get mired down in a specific debate over how many troops would remain for these limited missions." Levin said.

The Republican co-sponsor of the Levin-Reed amendment, Sen. Gordon Smith of Oregon, told reporters Tuesday afternoon, "What I like about it is that it says that America will no longer be the policeman of the civil war, but no terrorist in Iraq can ever sleep peacefully because it does not call for pullout from Iraq, but for a responsible way forward that protects America's interests and personnel and keeps al-Qaida on the run."

Would Iraq descend even further into anarchy if the Levin-Reed proposal became law, making it impossible for U.S. troops to carry out even limited missions?

"We're trying to increase the chances of success in Iraq," said Levin, "trying to find a way, if there is a way, to end the sectarian violence before it becomes even more of an all-out civil war."

But, as for ever-greater anarchy, Levin said, "We can not foreclose that possibility."

Reed said American forces could be stationed in the Kurdish area of northern Iraq and he added, “Way out in western Iraq, there are places where we have bases now which have not been challenged” by insurgent attacks.

“So operationally there are places where you could position forces within the country that will increase immensely their protection against attack,” Reed said.

NBC News video
Tony Snow discusses Iraq situation
July 10: White House Press Secretary Tony Snow talks with TODAY's Matt Lauer about criticism of President Bush's Iraq policy.
Today show

But don’t some Americans want all the troops out of Iraq? “You have people who are very sincerely talking about withdrawal,” Reed acknowledged. “I think they would probably add, ‘but in a manner that doesn’t disadvantage the government of Iraq’ and in some respect those two perspectives might come together."

Reed said, "I think there’s a very small group of people who want everybody out within a month. That’s probably not operationally feasible."

He said many senators are demanding that the president change U.S. strategy "from what looks like an open-ended commitment of doing anything necessary to create a thriving liberal democracy and market economy, to much more focused missions" such as training Iraqi security forces.

Reed also mentioned the remaining need for U.S. forces in Iraq to attack al-Qaida bases and operations “not just there, but around the world. This notion of striking terrorists is something people not only understand, but they know it’s important.”

Snowe sees troops remaining
Snowe, too, said she could accept something less than total withdrawal.

“Most (senators) on both sides are in agreement about keeping forces for a change of mission and that’s consistent with the Iraq Study Group recommendation which was either training the Iraqis or force protection or focusing on al-Qaida,” Snowe said. “And territorial integrity is another objective that the Iraq Study Group recommended. So, yes, there would be some forces remaining for those explicit purposes.”

Do her constituents understand that would leave tens of thousands of American soldier and Marines in Iraq?

“People in Maine and across the country understand that the way this evolves is to make sure that we don’t leave chaos behind,” she said.

So the Senate consensus this week is building for partial withdrawal of American forces, with the remaining troops — the exact number unspecified by senators who speak on the topic — garrisoned inside U.S. bases in Iraq.

This outcome would not satisfy presidential contender Gov. Bill Richardson, D-N.M., who has staked out the position of calling for complete exit of U.S. troops from Iraq.