It is premature to say that all of the troops will be withdrawn by the end of the year.  There are many things that could happen that would enable Obama to keep troops in Iraq. 

For example, even if Iraq doesn’t agree to give US troops immunity from criminal prosecution, our government could decide to keep troops in Iraq without fear of their being prosecuted by the Iraqi government simply by providing for the immediate removal (on military aircraft) of any US military members who engage in action that might lead to prosecution.  As long as the US doesn’t have an extradition treaty with Iraq, once the troops are out of the Iraq they would be safe from prosecution as long as they don’t travel to some other country that has an extradition treaty with Iraq.

ardee,

Please don’t misunderstand. I was not impeaching you or your sources. We have a simple disagreement over what may be factual.

Some estimate the number of contract security personnel to be upwards of 500,000. You believe that number to be closer to 50,000. The Japanese Ambassador to Iraq estimates the number of contract security personal, representing 37 nations and their diplomatic missions, to be 15,000-19,000.

I thank you for your efforts.

IMax, October 18 at 5:50 am Link to this comment

ardee,

I respect your opinion and, at the same time, disagree.

I believe Iraq will stand strong on its own. I also question a commitment to honesty from your source regarding raw numbers in the hiring of security personnel.

Of course we are free to hold disparate opinions on this or any subject. Below find a representative sampling of a quick Google search for the real facts:

http://rebelreports.com/post/116277092/obama-has-250-000-contractors-in-iraq-and-afghan

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/03/05/1078464637030.html

http://middleeast.about.com/od/iraq/a/iraq-contractors-troops.htm

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/08/10/mercenaries-in-iraq-to-take-over-soldiers-jobs.html

Impeaching the credibility of my “sources” aside the installation of puppet governments has been an ongoing foreign policy ploy of the US government going back decades, or even longer. If you are unaware of such actions I could link you to them forthwith. I do, however, believe you quite capable of doing the research yourself.

As to the viability of the current Iraqi govt. again there are reams of data ,some of it from our own government’s sources, questioning both the honesty and popularity of said govt. You should familiarize yourself with such and then, possibly, rethink your position. Or not.

The same can be said of the current govt. in power in Afghanistan as well, by the by. We simply suck at establishing a democratic form of government in our various intrusions into nations.

ardee:
I’ve read that we actually have 100,000 mercenaries there- all of course being paid handsomely on our dime.

Yeah, but how about the 100,000 plus privatized mercenaries we are still paying for?  We still have military bases there and always will- ensuring that a puppet government remains in power.

ardee,

I respect your opinion and, at the same time, disagree.

I believe Iraq will stand strong on its own. I also question a commitment to honesty from your source regarding raw numbers in the hiring of security personnel.

Let’s give the Iraqi people the credit they rightly deserve.

It seems this is good news for all Iraqis.

So, Imax,  the good news is that the corrupt puppet government of Iraq is in line to receive billions in oil revenue. I wonder how this translates to the benefit of the people of Iraq?

My own opinion is that ,when American troops leave Iraq, that government with fall forthwith. I believe that our government understands this as well, thus providing the reason for hiring over fifty thousand mercenaries to remain to protect that aforementioned corrupt govt.

Robespierre115, - “how will any of this benefit Iraqis?”

-

1. In the ways I’ve already outlined. Also, if we are to look at the double digit unemployment statistics in Iraq, we see the top goal amongst the population is jobs. - Business=Jobs.

2. Latin America is not Iraq or the Middle East.

3. The Iraqi government displayed it’s independents by not allowing foreign troops immunity from prosecution.

Robespierre115. I think it’s important to understand that your view of the world is not shared by the Iraqi people. They want, in fact they are inviting, all comers to do business with Iraq.

@IMax, how will any of this benefit Iraqis? Most likely domestic oligarchs will grow rich and fat in cutting deals with foreign corporations while average Iraqis will still live in vast poverty and insecurity, with US mercenaries roaming the countryside. We don’t need to speculate, Latin Americans can tell you the whole story from their own history with the U.S.

And as for Truthdig, “President Obama will be able to say that he kept one of his promises from the ’08 campaign trail come Dec. 31 of this year, when all but 160 American troops will leave Iraq after more than eight years of heavy military involvement (read: war) in the Middle Eastern nation.” Looks like this site is getting into Obama 2012 campaign mode, pathetic.

And why no mention of the State Department’s private army being assembled to stay in Iraq?

I apologize for my previous comment.

I thought it might be funny, but it isn’t really all that funny.

@ Imax

ahh… Robust diplomacy and no hubris… Sounds like the good old U. S. of A.

The fucking Stallion Pt. 4 by Ween

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMepAliHxu0&feature=related

I believe President Obama and the NSA deserve kudos in biding with agreements on security and eventual withdrawal as established between the prior U.S. administration and the Iraqi government.

Certainly the Iraqi government has every right to deny immunity to foreign troops and the U.S. has every right to make such a demand or decide to exit.

It has always seemed to me that what the world desires most is Iraqi oil on the open market at OPEC established prices for any and all to purchase. China clearly will continue to benefit most directly by this (the U.S. has long standing agreements to purchases most of it’s oil elsewhere). - For U.N. Security Counsel and G20 nations overall stability, with its positive and negative ramifications, is what has historically breed security in their own and varied interests.

“Robust” diplomacy in and around Iraq is exactly what’s called for now. Global Diplomats and business representatives benefit Iraq tremendously. - It’s preferable over boots and guns. That robust diplomatic corp will need security. There is no getting around this reality. It’s either U.S. troops, which very few want, or the State Dept. will continue using contractors. - Just as Japan, China, Saudi Arabia, Britain, Poland and many others do today in Iraq.

Every Head of State around the world is attempting to either barter or firm up longstanding agreements with the new Iraqi government. Nobody can make the mistake of hubris in believing the Iraqi people don’t have minds of their own. U.S. and other troops are leaving Iraq because that’s the way Iraqi’s want it.

It seems this is good news for all Iraqis.

Considering that an estimated 50,000 mercenaries will remain, Americans all, I doubt one can speak truth to the lie of our withdrawal.

We’ll get them out just in time to invade Iran before they can find another two-bit third world criminal to hire for some other nonsensical and nefrarious plot against another non-descript “dignitary” here in the good ol’ US of A!

“...America’s diplomatic presence in Iraq will continue to be robust and security contractors will abound.”

In other words, “withdrawal” does not mean withdrawal.

I hope we don’t get one drop of their oil.