  |
 |
| |
|
|
|
 Blair to Withdraw Up to 3,000 TroopsPosted on Feb 20, 2007
Tony Blair is expected to announce a major withdrawal of British troops from Iraq by Christmas—possibly up to half of the current deployment. Although Britons largely oppose the war, the news may come as something of a disappointment as there were rumors Blair was going to withdraw troops more rapidly.
Previous item: Ahmadinejad Demands 'Equal Conditions' for Talks Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment |
|
Washington’s Overrated ‘Old Hands’
Email
Print
Share
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Ma.gnolia
Newsvine
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Yahoo
Jump to Comments
Copyright © 2008 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved.
By GW=MCHammered, February 21, 2007 at 6:22 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
DRAFT MANDATE
(unofficial)
Be it known that on this day, February 21, 2007, We The People in order to maintain the Iraqi imperfect union, deem it necessary to draft all first born of those serving in the Federal government and those of all active lobbyists. The age range for draftees is eighteen through thirty. Draftees will report for military induction and assignment by March 1, 2007 at President George Bush’s ranch in Texas or face permanent exile.
Sincerely,
Report thisWe The People
By chuck i, February 21, 2007 at 8:15 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Well........if the Brits can withdraw troops & cheney says this is a good sign that things are better in iraq.....Why don’t we start to implement a withdrawl program now?????
Report thisBy Jon B, February 20, 2007 at 10:48 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
“But I still believe that our presence exacerbates the security situation and we should have a target for the withdrawal of all British troops by the end of October this year.” - Liberal Democratic leader Sir Manzie Campbell.
My goodness, brits want to withdraw a year earlier than Obama’s. I am eagerly waiting what aussie Howard has to say.
“bloody hell, bloody fool” - howie the assie
Report thisBy Aaitje, February 20, 2007 at 9:52 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Hmm…
Is it me, or does Blair’s sudden decision seem suspect especially after Prince Harry is adamant, and is forcing the issue to be deployed to Iraq?
Think Buckingham Palace made a call to Downing Street since Prince Harry’s apparent refusal to be deployed anywhere else than Iraq?
I guess when it comes to the possibility of spilling “blue blood” of any type, a resolution of peace doesn’t seem so hard to implement, huh?
There truly is something to the Progressives’ argument that had most Senators, and House Reps, as well as the pResident’s fam had blood in the battle, we wouldn’t be at war today.
Report thisBy vet240, February 20, 2007 at 8:20 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Britain hit the wall. The financial wall and the wall of dissent.
bush/cheney will put a positive spin on it. We haven’t hit the financial wall yet, and the Democrats swept both house elections due to the opposition to the war but their regeging on their campaign promises. Some of you still have money, that needs to find its way into the Haliburton,BKD, and Blackwater cash stash.
It’s a pity, we could have beaten the terrorist movement by keeping our forces small and adroit, and only attacking when it’s to our advantage, but that wouldn’t have made bush jr a “War President”. bush needed that on his resume to cover his cowardice in Vietnam.
I never capitalize the names of people I hold in contempt.
Report thisBy Dr. Don Key, February 20, 2007 at 5:50 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Too little, too late. Iraq is already a clusterf***.
Report thisBy Quy Tran, February 20, 2007 at 5:27 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Tony “poodle” Blair is much much wiser then his master who is king George.
Report this