Civilian National Security Force...
Posted By: sm on 2008-11-11
In Reply to: LOL! - Marmann
These are Obama's words...
"We cannot rely only on our military for our national security, we need to have a Civilian National Security force that is just as strong, just as well funded."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s
Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old. To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Civilian National Security Force
From FactCheck.org (Complete analysis at link below.)
Obama was not talking about a "security force" with guns or police powers. He was talking specifically about expanding AmeriCorps and the Peace Corps and the USA Freedom Corps, which is the volunteer initiative launched by the Bush administration after the attacks of 9/11, and about increasing the number of trained Foreign Service officers who populate U.S. embassies overseas.
I don't really understand the civilian force...
why not just beef up the military we already have? But, I don't actually think that it will ever happen, at least not to the extent that people are thinking and during Barrack's presidency. Americans will not allow that to come to fruition. It would take a very long gradual change for something like this to be implemented and accepted.
Does this help. Homeland security force.
KNOWN AS HOMELAND SECURITY FORCE, CIVIL DEFENSE.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwaAVJITx1Y&feature=related
This is about freedom of speech being taken away.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mn_llXvTx5g
This is about section 899A (3), developing home grown terrorists in our own land (civil defense).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLQ68jBGK8o&feature=related
So you don't believe we have national security concerns?
If you do believe we have national security issues then what is your answer to keeping us safe?
McCain and National Security
McCain Lobbyist Scandal Continues: Government Warned Senator That Campaign Manager Was Undermining National Interests
The lobbying firm of McCain campaign manager Rick Davis acted in direct opposition to American foreign interests, which prompted a warning to McCain's Senate office from the United States government, according to a recent New York Times article.
Much has been reported about Rick Davis, top McCain adviser and lobbyist whose company, Davis Manafort, made its fortune in part by accepting jobs that didn't require employees to register as lobbyists. Davis has been in particular hot water for his company's work with pro-Russian Ukranian political candidates; Davis arranged for one of Putin's allies to meet with McCain during the time.
However, the New York Times has managed to take that already embarrassing story and make it even worse:
Mr. McCain may have first become aware of Davis Manafort's activities in Ukraine as far back as 2005. At that time, a staff member at the National Security Council called Mr. McCain's Senate office to complain that Mr. Davis's lobbying firm was undercutting American foreign policy in Ukraine, said a person with direct knowledge of the phone call who spoke on condition of anonymity.
A campaign spokesman, when asked whether such a call had occurred, referred a reporter to Mr. McCain's office. The spokesman there, Robert Fischer, did not respond to repeated inquiries.
Such a call might mean that Mr. McCain has been long aware of Mr. Davis's foreign clients. Mr. Davis took a leave from his firm at the end of 2006.
This isn't the only time when Davis' business interests have appeared counter to those of the United States: Davis' Ukranian contacts shared several business ties with Iran.
McCain suffered from a perception problem last month when the extent of his lobbying connection caused his campaign to fire several key staffers, as well as institute a new conflict-of-interest policy. The McCain camp has said that Davis is unaffected by the policy, as its implementation is not retroactive. Davis is no longer registered as a lobbyist.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/12/mccain-lobbyist-scandal-c_n_106832.html
threat to national security
and YOU have undisputed proof of this?
National security and low taxes.. For me, that
nm
Right..and without strong National Security, the
nm
It's called national security. sm
jm is correct, in that the current administration's plans and policies have kept us safe.
A lot will be revealed, when it is safe to do so, so that our national security is not compromised.
You and I, as citizens, do not have the security clearance to be made aware of what has been averted.
Speaking of National Security,
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30107040/
I hope we are not having a war on US soil soon.
WASHINGTON - Cyberspies have penetrated the U.S. electrical grid and left behind software programs that could be used to disrupt the system, the Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday.
The spies came from China, Russia and other countries, and were believed to be on a mission to navigate the U.S. electrical system and its controls, the newspaper said, citing current and former U.S. national security officials.
The intruders have not sought to damage the power grid or other key infrastructure but officials said they could try during a crisis or war, the paper said in a report on its website.
"The Chinese have attempted to map our infrastructure, such as the electrical grid," a senior intelligence official told the Journal. "So have the Russians."
The espionage appeared pervasive across the United States and does not target a particular company or region, said a former Department of Homeland Security official.
"There are intrusions, and they are growing," the former official told the paper, referring to electrical systems. "There were a lot last year."
Authorities investigating the intrusions have found software tools left behind that could be used to destroy infrastructure components, the senior intelligence official said. He added, "If we go to war with them, they will try to turn them on."
Officials said water, sewage and other infrastructure systems also were at risk.
Protecting the electrical grid and other infrastructure is a key part of the Obama administration's cybersecurity review, which is to be completed next week.
No threat to national security?
We just posted where these facilities are and what is going on, but hey....don't worry....no national security risk. OMG! What a bunch of flipping morons!!!
Repubublican, former National Security Advisor,
Secretary of State turned off by McCains negative campaign, impressed by O's intelligence and steady hand in the face of pressing issues and economic crisis. "Taxes are always a redistribution of wealth and not socialism." Presidents get to examine tax structure. This is what perhaps one of the most respected republican with brains looks like. Highly unlikely he would endorse a socialist terrorist. Talks about need for "inclusion," not division and sees Obama as a "transformational" figure who reaches across generations.
Yep, that pretty much covers all the bases.
National Security Agency easedrops on Americans
more of less secure? Warrantless wiretapping on anybody, anytime for any reason, all being recorded. OK with you?
My biggest concern is National Security. Obama
nm
Between May and July 2001, the National Security Agency reported
at least 33 different intercepts indicating a possible imminent al Qaeda attack. The FBI issued 216 secret, internal threat warnings between January 1 and September 10, 2001, of which 6 mentioned possible attacks against airports or airlines. The Federal Aviation Administration issued 15 notices of possible terrorist threats against American airlines. The State Department issued 9 separate warnings during the same period to embassies and citizens abroad, including 5 that highlighted a general threat to Americans all over the world.
Yeah, that Bill Clinton wasn't doing his job alright.
Oh, wait.
National security? Civil liberties? Must be socialist conspiracy
This is an amazing article that not too suprisingly will probably go unaddressed, right along with Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae corporate bailout story. The're too busy getting ready for the coronation ball. However, I just wanted to thank you for passing this along. The links and other articles also lead to some insightful and interesting reads on stories that will probably end up thrown under the royal coach. Let them eat cake!
U.S. and past civilian deaths
U.S. and British forces bombed Dresden, Germany with the death of approximately 225,000 civilians, and it was intended as a purely civilian bombing.
From a history publication (with references to LeMay also made by Robert McNamara in The Fog of War):
When news concerning the bombing of Dresden got out, it led to an uproar that had to be quieted by cynical denials that this was U.S. or British policy. But it was, and it continued, now against Japan. In March 1945, more than 100,000 Japanese were killed in a firebombing raid on Tokyo as “canals boiled, metal melted, and buildings and human beings burst spontaneously into flames” (John Dower, War Without Mercy: Race & Power in the Pacific War [Pantheon Books, 1986]). By August 1945, 58 Japanese cities had been firebombed and the bomber commander, General Curtis LeMay, had to curtail his raids because he had run out of incendiary bombs. After the war, Le May remarked “I suppose if I had lost the war, I would have been tried as a war criminal.” Instead he was promoted, eventually heading the Strategic Air Command, where he advocated a pre-emptive nuclear “first strike” against the Soviets. During the Vietnam War, Le May notoriously called to “bomb them [the North Vietnamese] back into the Stone Age.”
Trigger-happy-civilian-aid-worker-journalist-slaughtering Israel
with a little help from their (only) US allies. As long as that is the case, any other country in the region who chooses to level the playing field by arming themselves in self defense with nuclear weapons has a much more plausible case than "do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do."
OP said not to force beliefs on others...
if you don't want to read religious toned posts, don't open them.
O says that he will force insurance
companies to insure preexisting conditions. That sounds like something that will put them out of business to me. No need to buy insurance until you need it. Think of all the lost jobs.
PS, NOT ENCOURAGE, FORCE!!
XX
Require = force
xx
I don't believe I force people
to convert to my religion. I don't kill in the name of my God. I am nothing like the Jihad extremists and for you to say that is just absolute BS and you know it. What you people seem to forget is that we are at war here. A war were people want me and you dead. I don't want to torture them for revenge but if we can get other names of people or any plot information to save American lives.....I'm all for it....including saving your atheist behind in the process. Doesn't quite sound like I'm a Jihad extremists or I'd say something like blow your butt up too since you won't convert to my religion but I don't see me saying that. So don't you EVER compare me to a terrorist.
I see all the dems are out in force...keep it up ladies...sm
.....having a good ol' time ganging up on me....I have come to expect no less from the left on this site.
She's dynamite and will get rave reviews....wait and see....wait and see.....
Once again, a "civilian military force" that is
ENDORSED BY BUSH.
That little tidbit was conveniently deleted from the link that was provided.
Keep believing all the hype and the lies. That's your choice, but don't insult me because I can tell the difference.
There is no force involved whatsoever. I do it
because I "choose" to do what the Bible commands. I love the Lord and want to do what His Word says. There is nothing forced about. If you don't think it's a sin, that is your perogative. I, however, feel that it is and that is my perogative, too.
From a founding member of Delta Force
http://www.dailynews.com/portlet/article/html/fragments/print_article.jsp?article=3641046
'Unit's' military expert has fighting words for Bush
By David Kronke, TV Critic
U-Entertainment
Eric Haney, a retired command sergeant major of the U.S. Army, was a founding member of Delta Force, the military's elite covert counter-terrorist unit. He culled his experiences for Inside Delta Force (Delta; $14), a memoir rich with harrowing stories, though in an interview, Haney declines with a shrug to estimate the number of times he was almost killed. (Perhaps the most high-profile incident that almost claimed his life was the 1980 failed rescue of the hostages in Iran.) Today, he's doing nothing nearly as dangerous: He serves as an executive producer and technical adviser for The Unit, CBS' new hit drama based on his book, developed by playwright David Mamet. Even up against American Idol, The Unit shows muscle, drawing 18 million viewers in its first two airings.
Since he has devoted his life to protecting his country in some of the world's most dangerous hot spots, you might assume Haney is sympathetic to the Bush administration's current plight in Iraq (the laudatory cover blurb on his book comes from none other than Fox's News' Bill O'Reilly). But he's also someone with close ties to the Pentagon, so he's privy to information denied the rest of us.
We recently spoke to Haney, an amiable, soft-spoken Southern gentleman, on the set of The Unit.
Q: What's your assessment of the war in Iraq?
A: Utter debacle. But it had to be from the very first. The reasons were wrong. The reasons of this administration for taking this nation to war were not what they stated. (Army Gen.) Tommy Franks was brow-beaten and ... pursued warfare that he knew strategically was wrong in the long term. That's why he retired immediately afterward. His own staff could tell him what was going to happen afterward.
We have fomented civil war in Iraq. We have probably fomented internecine war in the Muslim world between the Shias and the Sunnis, and I think Bush may well have started the third world war, all for their own personal policies.
Q: What is the cost to our country?
A: For the first thing, our credibility is utterly zero. So we destroyed whatever credibility we had. ... And I say we, because the American public went along with this. They voted for a second Bush administration out of fear, so fear is what they're going to have from now on.
Our military is completely consumed, so were there a real threat - thankfully, there is no real threat to the U.S. in the world, but were there one, we couldn't confront it. Right now, that may not be a bad thing, because that keeps Bush from trying something with Iran or with Venezuela.
The harm that has been done is irreparable. There are more than 2,000 American kids that have been killed. Tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis have been killed � which no one in the U.S. really cares about those people, do they? I never hear anybody lament that fact. It has been a horror, and this administration has worked overtime to divert the American public's attention from it. Their lies are coming home to roost now, and it's gonna fall apart. But somebody's gonna have to clear up the aftermath and the harm that it's done just to what America stands for. It may be two or three generations in repairing.
Q: What do you make of the torture debate? Cheney ...
A: (Interrupting) That's Cheney's pursuit. The only reason anyone tortures is because they like to do it. It's about vengeance, it's about revenge, or it's about cover-up. You don't gain intelligence that way. Everyone in the world knows that. It's worse than small-minded, and look what it does.
I've argued this on Bill O'Reilly and other Fox News shows. I ask, who would you want to pay to be a torturer? Do you want someone that the American public pays to torture? He's an employee of yours. It's worse than ridiculous. It's criminal; it's utterly criminal. This administration has been masters of diverting attention away from real issues and debating the silly. Debating what constitutes torture: Mistreatment of helpless people in your power is torture, period. And (I'm saying this as) a man who has been involved in the most pointed of our activities. I know it, and all of my mates know it. You don't do it. It's an act of cowardice. I hear apologists for torture say, Well, they do it to us. Which is a ludicrous argument. ... The Saddam Husseins of the world are not our teachers. Christ almighty, we wrote a Constitution saying what's legal and what we believed in. Now we're going to throw it away.
Q: As someone who repeatedly put your life on the line, did some of the most hair-raising things to protect your country, and to see your country behave this way, that must be ...
A: It's pretty galling. But ultimately I believe in the good and the decency of the American people, and they're starting to see what's happening and the lies that have been told. We're seeing this current house of cards start to flutter away. The American people come around. They always do.
THE UNIT
What: Action-adventure about special-ops unit.
Where: CBS (Channel 2).
When: 9 p.m. Tuesdays.
---
David Kronke (818) 713-3638 david.kronke@dailynews.com
It's a beautiful thing to see dems out in force
nm
I see the Witches of Leftwick are out in force today....sm
just posting under different names.
Halloween must be around the corner.
wait for it......
.......the pig comments are about to be unleashed.....lol.....again.....
Israel air force is ready to attack Iran
capable of making nuclear bomb. I have been reading about Israel and Iran every day and looks like one of these days we are going to hear a special report that Israel is attacking Iran. My question is if the US is going to help? I read Iran would attack the US if US tries to help Israel. I also read Iran has missels pointed in our direction to hit our oil refineries and power plants in the gulf coast states.
The first 2 links are about Israel ready to attack Iran.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=75885§ionid=351020104
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,455005,00.html
This is about Iran nuclear capibility as of today from Fox news.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,455024,00.html
They are also a viable grass roots political force
in the region, just like Hezbollah. How successful was Israel in trying to eradicate Hezbollah by bombing them off the face of the earth just 2 short years ago in Lebanon? The harder they try to suppress with violence, starvation, dehumanization, occupation and genocidal wars, the stronger those movements become. Israel is the consummate poster child for Einstein's definition of insanity.
Until the US and Israel have the guts to come to terms with the root causes of WHY these Islamic movements are gaining such traction across the board in the region, we are doomed to stay mired in the same atrocious tit-for-tat cycles of wholesale slaughter and human suffering. There seems to be an endless supply of that on both sides of the fence. The question is why and what can e do to effect a different outcome? Here's a clue for you. End the occupation.
SINCE WHEN DOES THE KORAN FORCE PEOPLE TO CONVERT TO ISLAM?..
Are you still living in the stone ages?
Big Brother is I believe a covert force infiltrating each and every one's personal lives without
their knowledge. That is hardly the same thing as a poster on an MT board noticing that 4 different names post the same thing. I think that is creepy. I have been on this board for a long time and I recognize patterns, phrases that are repeated verbatim from far in the past, things people remember about me and say something like ***weren't you the one who ....*** and it is posted under a name different from the original. I leave Big Brother to our shadow government, wherever they are.
Air Force chief: Test weapons on US citizens before using on enemies.
Air Force chief: Test weapons on testy U.S. mobs
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Nonlethal weapons such as high-power microwave devices should be used on American citizens in crowd-control situations before being used on the battlefield, the Air Force secretary said Tuesday.
The object is basically public relations. Domestic use would make it easier to avoid questions from others about possible safety considerations, said Secretary Michael Wynne.
If we're not willing to use it here against our fellow citizens, then we should not be willing to use it in a wartime situation, said Wynne. (Because) if I hit somebody with a nonlethal weapon and they claim that it injured them in a way that was not intended, I think that I would be vilified in the world press.
The Air Force has paid for research into nonlethal weapons, but he said the service is unlikely to spend more money on development until injury problems are reviewed by medical experts and resolved.
Nonlethal weapons generally can weaken people if they are hit with the beam. Some of the weapons can emit short, intense energy pulses that also can be effective in disabling some electronic devices.
On another subject, Wynne said he expects to choose a new contractor for the next generation aerial refueling tankers by next summer. He said a draft request for bids will be put out next month, and there are two qualified bidders: the Boeing Co. and a team of Northrop Grumman Corp. and European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co., the majority owner of European jet maker Airbus SAS.
The contract is expected to be worth at least $20 billion (&euro15.75 billion).
Chicago, Illinois-based Boeing lost the tanker deal in 2004 amid revelations that it had hired a top Air Force acquisitions official who had given the company preferential treatment.
Wynne also said the Air Force, which is already chopping 40,000 active duty, civilian and reserves jobs, is now struggling to find new ways to slash about $1.8 billion (&euro1.4 billion) from its budget to cover costs from the latest round of base closings.
He said he can't cut more people, and it would not be wise to take funding from military programs that are needed to protect the country. But he said he also incurs resistance when he tries to save money on operations and maintenance by retiring aging aircraft.
We're finding out that those are, unfortunately, prized possessions of some congressional districts, said Wynne, adding that the Air Force will have to take some appetite suppressant pills. He said he has asked employees to look for efficiencies in their offices.
The base closings initially were expected to create savings by reducing Air Force infrastructure by 24 percent. |
|
Find this article at: http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/09/12/usaf.weapons.ap/index.html |
Like that'll happen. Trying to bomb a grassroots political force
into extinction will be about as effective and trying to bomb Iraq into democracy.
Thanks to their last fiasco when they tried this in Lebanon, Hezbollah has an 80+% approval rating among Lebanese factions (13 points higher than O) and its support among Lebanese Sunni Sunni, Christians and Druze soared in 2006. Their demonstrations attracted hundreds of thousands of protestors, especially in the aftermath of Israel's failed massacre, when protests against PM Siniora sent his approval ratings into a deep-6.
Hezbollah was given veto power in the parliment via the Doha Agreement in 2008 and under its newly formed National Unity Government, Hezbollah gained the Labor Minister's appointment and holds 11 out of 30 seats, or slightly over one-third alongside Greek Orthodox and Catholics, Maronites, Armenians, Shia, Sunni and Druz.
So you see, instead of giving Hezbollah the boot, Israel legitimized their standing the Lebanese government.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0728/p06s01-wome.html
http://www.mideastmonitor.org/issues/0609/0609_6.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006%E2%80%932008_Lebanese_political_protests
http://www.tayyar.org/Tayyar/UnityGovernmentEN.htm
http://www.cfr.org/publication/9155/hezbollah.html?breadcrumb=%2F
National ID.......
Not only won't you be able to fly, you won't be able to go into any federal building without one. A few states have said they will not do national ID cards (drivers license) and then some liberal idiots in Congress said well, if you don't go along with this government-backed pulling of your civil rights right out from under your nose, your state will receive NO government funding of any type, schools, roads, etc. Now if that ain't forced servitude into government, what is???? So many people really don't believe that is a problem. Since when do you feel you need a national ID card, for what purpose? As the government usually does, they mandate garbage on the citizens of this country in order to protect us......yea, right. No national ID card is going to protect us. If we can't protect the southern or northern borders of this country, how in the world will a little 'old card do that? It won't.....plain and simple. But then again, any time our dear old government mandates anything, the citizens of this country are screwed with fewer and fewer rights. Constitution is going down the tubes quickly.
There's more than 8,000 National Guard
on standby right now waiting for the call. They are not all in Iraq like some people are falsely reporting.
National Guard
Strain of Iraq War Means the Relief Burden Will Have to Be Shared
By Ann Scott Tyson Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, August 31, 2005; A14
With thousands of their citizen-soldiers away fighting in Iraq, states hit hard by Hurricane Katrina scrambled to muster forces for rescue and security missions yesterday -- calling up Army bands and water-purification teams, among other units, and requesting help from distant states and the active-duty military.
As the devastation threatened to overwhelm state resources, federal authorities called on the Pentagon to mobilize active-duty aircraft, ships and troops and set up an unprecedented task force to coordinate a wider military response, said officials from the Northern Command, which oversees homeland defense.
National Guard officials in the states acknowledged that the scale of the destruction is stretching the limits of available manpower while placing another extraordinary demand on their troops -- most of whom have already served tours in Iraq or Afghanistan or in homeland defense missions since 2001.
More than 6,000 Guard members were mobilized in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida when the storm struck on Monday, with the number rising to 8,000 yesterday and hundreds more expected to be called to active duty, National Guard officials said yesterday.
Missing the personnel is the big thing in this particular event. We need our people, said Lt. Andy Thaggard, a spokesman for the Mississippi National Guard, which has a brigade of more than 4,000 troops in central Iraq. Louisiana also has about 3,000 Guard troops in Baghdad.
Mississippi has about 40 percent of its Guard force deployed or preparing to deploy and has called up all remaining Guard units for hurricane relief, Thaggard said. Those include the Army band based in Jackson, Miss. They are mustering transportation to move them south, he said. Soldiers who have lost their homes are exempt, he said.
Mississippi has requested troops and aircraft from about eight other states -- including military police and engineers from Alabama, helicopters and crews from Arkansas and Georgia, and aircraft-maintenance experts from Connecticut, who are filling in for a Mississippi maintenance unit that is heading to the Middle East.
This is the biggest disaster we've ever had, so we're going to need more aircraft than we've got, said Col. Bradly S. MacNealy, the Mississippi Army National Guard's aviation officer. Mississippi has had to borrow from Arkansas UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters fitted with hoists, using them together with the Coast Guard to pluck to safety several dozen people stranded by floodwaters, he said.
Chinook helicopters from Georgia, Alabama and Mississippi are flying the equivalent of 18 large truckloads of critical supplies -- including ice, water, food and chain saws for road-clearing crews -- to Mississippi's coast, he said.
In Alabama, all the major Guard units activated for the disaster have already served in Iraq, and some still have contingents there, said Alabama Guard spokesman Norman Arnold.
Capt. Richard Locke of the Guard's 1st Battalion 167th Infantry headed toward Mobile yesterday with a force of 400 soldiers cobbled together from four units because the rest of the battalion is in Iraq.
Carrying M-16 rifles and 9mm pistols, the soldiers are assigned to control traffic at unlighted intersections, and patrol in Humvees and on foot to prevent looting.
Recruiting and retention problems are worsening the strain on Guard forces in hurricane-ravaged states. Alabama's Army National Guard has a strength of 11,000 troops -- or 78 percent of the authorized number. We're just losing too many out the back door, Arnold said.
Considering our national debt is now......... sm
sitting at, what, $3 trillion dollars, I doubt government oversight would be of much benefit to the auto industry. In fact, I kind of feel like the government really has the audacity to ask a private industry to prove a solvent plan when the government can't even balance their own books. Either way, the auto industry is going under. It's just a matter of whether it is now or 6 months from now.
its from the national review -
not worth reading, notorious right wing organization.
What do you think the national guard is
Our national guard is supposed to be the first responders if needed for natural disasters. Remember them? That's their job.....not the Army.
Ask yourself why you have never seen it scrolled across your evening news....they know people will explode over it but do it quietly and without OUR permission (remember this is OUR country?) and no one will be the wiser until it's done and in place.
It is on an Army website, not something the average citizen will be looking for. "Homeland tours" my butt. Permanent part of the active Army. The last thing this country needs is a full-time military brigade TOURING our country.
Well, when you look at the national polls
and see that 37% of Americans are in favor of the bill, I guess you can say that *most* people don't want this stimulus!
Britain to pull troops from Iraq as Blair says 'don't force me out' sm-long article
Britain to pull troops from Iraq as Blair says 'don't force me out'
· Defence Secretary confident withdrawal will start in May · Plan follows pressure for exit strategy
Peter Beaumont and Gaby Hinsliff Sunday September 25, 2005 The Observer
British troops will start a major withdrawal from Iraq next May under detailed plans on military disengagement to be published next month, The Observer can reveal.
The document being drawn up by the British government and the US will be presented to the Iraqi parliament in October and will spark fresh controversy over how long British troops will stay in the country. Tony Blair hopes that, despite continuing and widespread violence in Iraq, the move will show that there is progress following the conflict of 2003.
Britain has already privately informed Japan - which also has troops in Iraq - of its plans to begin withdrawing from southern Iraq in May, a move that officials in Tokyo say would make it impossible for their own 550 soldiers to remain.
The increasingly rapid pace of planning for British military disengagement has been revealed on the eve of the Labour Party conference, which will see renewed demands for a deadline for withdrawal. It is hoped that a clearer strategy on Iraq will quieten critics who say that the government will not be able to 'move on' until Blair quits. Yesterday, about 10,000 people demonstrated against the army's continued presence in the country.
Speaking to The Observer this weekend, the Defence Secretary, John Reid, insisted that the agreement being drawn up with Iraqi officials was contingent on the continuing political process, although he said he was still optimistic British troops would begin returning home by early summer.
'The two things I want to insist about the timetable is that it is not an event but a process, and that it will be a process that takes place at different speeds in different parts of the country. I have said before that I believe that it could begin in some parts of the country as early as next July. It is not a deadline, but it is where we might be and I honestly still believe we could have the conditions to begin handover. I don't see any reason to change my view.
'But if circumstances change I have no shame in revising my estimates.'
The disclosures follow rising demands for the government to establish a clearer strategy for bringing troops home following the kidnapping of two British SAS troopers in Basra and the scenes of violence that surrounded their rescue. Last week Blair's own envoy to Iraq, Sir Jeremy Greenstock, warned that Britain could be forced out if Iraq descends so far into chaos that 'we don't have any reasonable prospect of holding it together'.
Continued tension between the Iraqi police force, the Iraqi administration and British troops was revealed again yesterday when an Iraqi magistrate called for the arrest of the two British special forces soldiers. who were on a surveillance mission when they were taken into custody by Iraqi police and allegedly handed on to a militia.
For Blair, the question of withdrawal is one of the most difficult he is facing. The Prime Minister has abandoned plans, announced last February, to publish his own exit strategy setting out the milestones which would have to be met before quitting: instead, the plans are now being negotiated between a commission representing the Shia-dominated Iraqi government, and senior US and UK diplomats and military commanders in Baghdad.
Senior military sources have told The Observer that the document will lay out a point-by-point 'road map' for military disengagement by multinational forces, the first steps of which could be put in place soon after December's nationwide elections.
Each stage of the withdrawal would be locally judged on regional improvements in stability, with units being withdrawn as Iraqi units are deemed capable of taking over. Officials familiar with the negotiations said that conditions for withdrawal would not demand a complete cessation of insurgent violence, or the end of al-Qaeda atrocities.
According to the agreement under negotiation, each phase would be triggered when key security, stability and political targets have been reached. The phased withdrawal strategy - the British side of which is expected to take at least 12 months to complete - would see UK troops hand over command responsibility for security to senior Iraqi officers, while remaining in support as a reserve force.
In the second phase British Warriors and other armoured vehicles would be removed from daily patrols, before a complete withdrawal of British forces to barracks.
The final phase - departure of units - would follow a period of months where Iraqi units had demonstrated their ability to deal with violence in their areas of operation.
Blair will tackle his critics over Iraq in his conference speech, aides said this weekend, but would decline to give a public deadline for withdrawing troops. He is expected to make several major interventions on the war in the coming weeks, before a vote on the new constitution in mid-October, explaining how Iraq could be steered towards a sufficiently stable situation to allow troops to come home.
'What we are not going to set out is a timetable: what we are going to set out is a process of developing that security capability,' said a Downing Street source. 'We don't want to be there any longer than we have to be, the Iraqis don't want us to be there any longer than we have to be, but the Iraqi Prime Minister has made it very clear that our presence there is one that is necessary.'
It was revealed yesterday that an Iraqi judge issued the warrants for the arrest of the two rescued soldiers, accusing them of killing one policeman and wounding another, carrying unlicensed weapons and holding false identification.
The continuing preparations for a military withdrawal come, however, as officials are bracing themselves for a new political crisis in Iraq next month, with what many regard as the inevitable rejection of a new constitution by a two-thirds majority in three provinces, sufficient to kill the document and trigger new elections.
The same officials believe that a failure of the controversial constitution - which Sunnis say favours the Shia majority - would require at least another year of political negotiations, threatening any plans to disengage.
Does he even know the words of the National Anthem? sm
I don't remember him singing either, in the clip I saw.
Just wondering if anybody knew?
A ? for those in favor of national healthcare
What is your rationale for wanting government in charge of your healthcare? You have to know that if this happens, healthcare in this country IS going to be rationed, the same as it's been rationed in Great Britain, Sweden, and Canada. There will be long waits for procedures that we now take for granted being done in a very short time. I know Obama promised the same healthcare as he now has in the senate...do you believe him?
cancer and national health
It's these sort of false concerns -- LOOK OUT, SIX TO TWELVE MONTH WAITS AND BY THEN YOU'RE DEAD! DEAD!!!! -- that impede progress toward a fair healthcare system. They're repetition of talking points, nothing more. A ten-second internet search would tell you, for instance, that in the UK:
-Over 99% of people with suspected cancer are now seen by a specialist within two
weeks of being urgently referred by their GP.
-Over 99% of patients with cancer are receiving their first treatment within one
month of diagnosis.
-Over 96% of patients with cancer are receiving their first treatment within two
months of being urgently referred by their GP.
Now I'll leave it to you and Google to find the comparable numbers for the US.
The larger point is, though, that if you decide this nation doesn't need universal healthcare, then you need to say exactly who it is you don't want care provided to. Because that's all this ever comes down to: Who do you include, and who do you leave out?
Our new national anthem --- for all you Obots.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l46t_nrySg4
The National Guard already watches them.
Had a friend who was in Arizona for 6 months doing just that.
Not the same at all! The man inherited a national crisis,,,,,,sm
the likes of which have not been seen since the Great Depression, he had no hand at all in creating it. But he was brave enough and altruistic enough to come forward and TRY to bring changes that WOULD HELP OUR COUNTRY IN THE LONG RUN. Do you like instant Cup-A-Soup and coffee, because you and so many others are putting the RIDICULOUS load on Obama's shoulders to INSTANTLY come up with the perfect answer to all the crises (and yes, this is a multi-dimentional problem, no quick fix here), make everyone happy, snap his fingers, and poof the big bad depression that has been brewing for a LONG TIME since the Bush administration, and I say that because under President Clinton we had record surpluses in our nation, and by the by, you think W. was well-polished, well-experienced to head this country just cuz Daddy did? Come off it, he hired most of Daddy's friend and cabinet, he took his cues, but the poor guy could not even speak well, even with his Yale education. This man has been in office 4 months versus the past 8 years, a bit of inequity here?
You are quoting from the NATIONAL ENQUIRER! Do you remember.....
All of the stuff they printed and continue to print about Clinton. I didn't even believe it. I am sure you didn't either, but it's the old double standard. If they say something YOU want to believe, all of a sudden they are credible. What a freaking joke.
It also stands for National Drug Code but no
It's the National Democratic Congress, of which I'm sure some of you, or maybe not.....never mind. I've realized dems on this board aren't really interested in really finding out about the real Obama.
Study up and don't come back here acting as if you can't find anything. If you want, you will. And you'll know it when you see it.
Connect the dots.
|