News Last combat troops pulled out of Iraq

[CRGreathouse]

For simplifying I would ask you to make an argument.

??

I have no argument, I'm merely trying to follow the thread.

 

[mheslep]

The only significance IMO of the current withdrawal of troops is that it reduces the number of US troops in Iraq. As combat troops, they weren't in combat except as needed. The remaining troops can engage in combat "if need be."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100819/ts_alt_afp/iraqunrestmilitarytroops

Sounds like these guys are light infantry and support troops, though I don't really know. If so, that's fine for fighting counter insurgents, but not the preferred force to oppose, say, the Iranians crossing the border in force and attempting to annex Basrah. In other words, all combat troops are not the same.

 

[Jack21222]

The only significance IMO of the current withdrawal of troops is that it reduces the number of US troops in Iraq. As combat troops, they weren't in combat except as needed. The remaining troops can engage in combat "if need be."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100819/ts_alt_afp/iraqunrestmilitarytroops

Hey russ, this link basically states what I heard on the news the other night. Thanks, SW VandeCarr

 

[Supercritical]

I strongly suggest folks peruse the http://www.brookings.edu/saban/iraq-index.aspx if you haven't already. It can answer a lot of questions brought up here, and will probably soon see an update in light of current events.

Sure, they're a think-tank, but I maintain that their index is probably the single best resource on Iraq (they have indices for Afghanistan and Pakistan as well). And you can read on wikipedia on how various media entities have attempted to place them politically.

 

[mheslep]

I strongly suggest folks peruse the http://www.brookings.edu/saban/iraq-index.aspx

Thanks. Per Brookings the Iraqi civilian fatality rate is about 10 per 100,000 now, which compares to a homicide rate of ~5 per 100,000 in the in US.