[Marxism] Iraq: Where and how to pull out?

[Walter Lippmann]

Most people see that the "surge" is NOT working. Even the military brass
seems to be aware of that fact. All of that falling out among the various
politicians in Iraq is a sign that their attempt to cobble together some
kind of regime isn't working. So they're a bit like rats jumping off of
a stinking ship. No matter how you slice it, people don't like liberators 
who come bearing bayonets! The national question, the right of Iraq to be 
free of foreign invaders and occupiers, that's the key to this struggle!


Walter Lippmann
Los Angeles, California
============================================================================

LOS ANGELES TIMES:
Joint Chiefs nominee questioned on Iraq
No amount of troops or time will make a difference unless there 
is political reconciliation, Mullen says at a confirmation hearing.
By Paul Richter, Times Staff Writer
August 1, 2007 
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-na-mullen1aug01,1,7791146.story

INTERESTING: 
The print edition has a different headline. There it says:
"Joint Chiefs pick sees little political progress in Iraq"

========================================================================================
Also in today's L.A. Times, we read that the State Department hired
Ozomatli, a local band which has been part of the left for many
years, which performs at all sorts of anti-war and labor-oriented
mobilizations, and they're now touring the Middle East. Probably
they're getting a lot more favorable impression and publicity for the
U.S. than Gates and Rice are getting. Ozomatli is bringing good
feelings of peace and love, while Rice and Gates are bring billions
and billions of dollars in weapons.

LOS ANGELES TIMES
U.S. State Dept. drafts Ozomatli for tour
The U.S. sends the antiwar L.A. band on a diplomatic mission to the heart of the Arab world.
By Borzou Daragahi, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
August 1, 2007 
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-et-ozomatli1aug01,1,4869289.story
========================================================================================

Iraq: Where and how to pull out?  
By Néstor García Iturbe
sarahnes at cubarte.cult.cu
May 18, 2007

http://www.walterlippmann.com/docs1427.html
A CubaNews translation. Edited by Walter Lippmann. This has been posted
to several other e-mail lists. The author is a retired Cuban diplomat living in
Havana, writing articles and books. Thanks to Saul Landau for sharing this.

Organizing a withdrawal from Iraq is precisely the Pentagon
strategists' most important dilemma these days. Even if President
Bush insists on undertaking actions aimed at winning the war, they
are all convinced that a pullout is imperative, bound to be rushed by
a major military defeat if put off much longer. The general idea is
to be ready for that moment and to try to avoid the Apocalypse.

It's an undeniable fact that the U.S. armed forces have gained vast
experience in withdrawals in the last few years, although they can't
be said to have been carried out in an orderly fashion and without
grave consequences for soldiers and sympathizers alike.

The fall of Saigon in 1975 resulted from that initiative which they
called the Vietnamization of the war, an attempt to have U.S.
military personnel replaced with local troops. We all know the
outcome of that measure: still fresh in our minds is the image of
those helicopters on the U.S. embassy's roof striving to fly out the
collaborators as they struggled to be evacuated from the premises.
It's a formula they have tried to repeat in Iraq, albeit with poor
results.

Similar events, each with its own characteristics, were experienced
by U.S. forces in Lebanon in the 1980s and Somalia a decade later. In
both cases a withdrawal became necessary, but what made either move
much more costly was precisely that the final decision took too long,
as the government hoped "to no avail" for a favorable reversal of the
confrontation.

Were the pullout to take place today, May 18, it would involve
134,000 troops; add a further 30,000 men if postponed for one or two
months. According to the Pentagon, there are nine million tons of
equipment deployed in Iraq, including tanks, trucks, bulldozers,
cannons, mortars, rifles, ammunition and other combat means, all of
which would have to be taken out in a pullout.

Furthermore, think of the additional burden of other logistic
materials such as uniforms, footwear, food, medicines, fuel, tents,
mattresses, computers, sound equipment, and so forth. All this could
be just left behind or delivered to local collaborators to avoid its
relocation.

In case of a pullout, the U.S. authorities have talked about leaving
in Iraq 40% of the equipment and supplies they have there, part of
which has been lost in or consumed by the war. Yet, the decision
would entail moving more than 5 million tons.

If organized by land, quite a few thousands vehicles would be needed
to carry troops and supplies. Some could be transported in aircraft
to friendly territory and shipped to the U.S. from there. Fewer
vehicles would be required that way, but still thousands could be
involved in an operation bound to take several months until
completion.

Once at the seaport, a true fleet would be required to transport
them. Ships would have to be hired from commercial companies,
provided they have them in sufficient numbers to carry such tonnage.
Such an operation is deemed to last 6 months and cost approximately
800 million dollars.

Once all this is figured out, the most important consideration pops
up: Which way should a withdrawal take? The Pentagon strategists are
working hard to find an acceptable solution to this serious problem.

Relatively near Iran's borders, Baghdad is the enclave of most U.S.
forces, but a rather unlikely destination for a pullout given the
current differences between both countries.

That would be an invasion rather than a pullout. Syria, where
political disagreement would play a key role, could also be crossed
off the list of probable target countries.

Turkey might be a destination for U.S. forces deployed in northern
Iraq. It's not only the most logical choice, but one to make the
Baghdad operation easier.

Jordan may also prove an acceptable way out for the troops, since its
borders are 600 kilometers from the Iraqi capital, that is, halfway
to Israel, America's sanctuary. They could leave their gear in the
U.S.-owned military warehouses there and thus keep them handy in case
of future conflicts.

Leaving Iraq through the Persian Gulf is another possibility to take
into account: withdrawal might start by a southward deployment to
Basra, from where one part of the troops would continue toward nearby
ports while the rest would cross to Kuwait and board their ships in a
more peaceful environment. That a significant number of equipment and
troops could go on to Saudi Arabia to get as far as possible from the
war zone and use less-congested harbors cannot be ruled out.

Some steps have been taken in the field of diplomacy and
international relations to draw up a favorable framework for U.S.
action. The talks between the U.S. and Iran at the Conference of
Iraq's Neighbors held in Egypt are an example of that.

Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Mrs. Nancy Pelosi's
visit to Syria, and her meeting with president Bashar Assad, could be
connected to all this.

There's a pullout brewing, and as many are convinced, the sooner it's
done the less disastrous it will be.


================================
WALTER LIPPMANN
Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews
writer - photographer - activist
http://www.walterlippmann.com
================================