British Troops to Withdraw From Iraq

bija · February 21, 2007

SBS World News <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Australia</st1:place></st1:country-region> http://worldnewsaustralia.com.au

The White House confirmed that Britain — the United States' main wartime ally — will begin pulling its 7,100 troops out of Iraq.

White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe says British Prime Minister Tony Blair has told US President George W Bush of the move in a telephone call yesterday.

Word that Mr Bush's closest ally was pulling out came at a delicate time for the <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">US</st1:place></st1:country-region> leader, facing heavy opposition to his deployment of another 21,500 US soldiers nearly four years into the unpopular war.

But Mr Johndroe called the British move a positive sign of increasing stabilisation in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Iraq</st1:place></st1:country-region>.

"President Bush sees this as a sign of success and what is possible for us once we help the Iraqis deal with the sectarian violence in <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Baghdad</st1:place></st1:City>," he said.

"The president is grateful for the support of the British Forces in the past and into the future. While the United Kingdom is maintaining a robust force in southern Iraq, we're pleased that conditions in Basra have improved sufficiently that they are able to transition more control to the Iraqis."

"The United States shares the same goal of turning responsibility over to the Iraqi Security Forces and reducing the number of American troops in Iraq."

Withdrawl to begin 'in weeks'

In London, media reports said Mr Blair will announce the withdrawal of thousands of his country's troops will begin in weeks.

According to The Sun newspaper, Mr Blair will announce that the first contingent of 1,500 troops will leave the war-torn country and arrive back in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Britain</st1:place></st1:country-region> in a matter of weeks, and a further 1,500 will follow by the end of the year.

A spokesman for Blair's <st1:place w:st="on">Downing Street</st1:place> office would not confirm or deny the report.

"The prime minister said he will update parliament first about these matters, and it's right that he does that," the spokesman said.

<st1:country-region w:st="on">Britain</st1:country-region> has about 7,100 troops in <st1:country-region w:st="on">Iraq</st1:country-region>, most of them based around the southern city of <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Basra</st1:place></st1:City>. It is the second-largest foreign contingent of soldiers after that of the <st1:country-region w:st="on">United States</st1:country-region>, which has more than 140,000 troops in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Iraq</st1:place></st1:country-region>.

A total of 132 British troops have died since the start of the US-led invasion in March 2003, according to a count based on Pentagon figures.

Mr Blair's move puts greater pressure on Bush to demonstrate results from the US troop "surge" he announced in January as part of his last-ditch strategy to restore security in Iraq.

More than 3,100 <st1:country-region w:st="on">US</st1:country-region> solders have died in the conflict, and <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">US</st1:place></st1:country-region> public sentiment has turned strongly against the war.

On Friday the US House of Representatives rebuked Bush's troop escalation plan, though opposition Democrats failed to get enough support among Mr Bush's Republicans in the Senate to pass a symbolic resolution.

Democrats are now considering how to put more teeth in their efforts to change the president's war policy, including a possible measure to revoke the October 2002 authorisation that allowed Mr Bush to invade <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Iraq</st1:place></st1:country-region>.

"We are determined that we're going to change course in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Iraq</st1:place></st1:country-region>," Senator Carl Levin told Fox television on Sunday.

Like President Bush, Mr Blair has come under heavy pressure from lawmakers and the public to get troops out of <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Iraq</st1:place></st1:country-region>.

On Sunday the British prime minister rejected suggestions he should bear responsibility for the sectarian violence in <st1:country-region w:st="on">Iraq</st1:country-region> but said <st1:country-region w:st="on">Britain</st1:country-region> and the <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">United States</st1:place></st1:country-region> had a duty to bring it to an end.

"Of course I am devastated by the numbers of people who have died in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Iraq</st1:place></st1:country-region>, but it's not British and American troops who are killing them," Mr Blair told BBC television in an interview.

"They are being killed by people who are deliberately using terrorism to try to stop the country getting on its feet. It's not a question of being culpable. I feel a deep sense of responsibility to put the situation right," he said.

bija · February 21, 2007

This is breaking news since, Prime Minister of Australia, Mr. John Howard has confirmed in the last couple of days, that he will be sending more troops to war torn Iraq. This decision has been made to co-incide with Mr. Dick Cheney's recent visit to Australia.

I just hope to God that some resolution to this conflict can eventuate. One can only but feel for the suffering of the Iraqi people. I may be naive, but I question those who are responsible for deciding to invade Iraq.

Surely this material sphere is degraded, and the competency of leaders who make such serious decisions needs to be questioned. There surely seems to be a need for the ruling class to take heed of the Brahmana (spiritual leaders) class. From the outset, major religious leaders advised against invading Iraq. But their call was unheeded by the decision makers (politicians).

bija · February 21, 2007

On Sunday the British prime minister rejected suggestions he should bear responsibility for the sectarian violence in <st1:country-region w:st="on">Iraq</st1:country-region> but said <st1:country-region w:st="on">Britain</st1:country-region> and the <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">United States</st1:place></st1:country-region> had a duty to bring it to an end.

"Of course I am devastated by the numbers of people who have died in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Iraq</st1:place></st1:country-region>, but it's not British and American troops who are killing them," Mr Blair told BBC television in an interview.

"They are being killed by people who are deliberately using terrorism to try to stop the country getting on its feet. It's not a question of being culpable. I feel a deep sense of responsibility to put the situation right," he said. quote by Mr. Tony Blair (from the above news article).

Where does the responsiblity lie? It is not an easy question to answer.

I look at it this way. If there is a big boulder sitting at the edge of a cliff. A person comes up and gives it a push. The big boulder falls rapidly down the cliff, hits the ground, and breaks into a multitude of pieces.

Who is responsible for the big boulder breaking into a multitude of pieces.

The person who pushed the boulder? The ground that the boulder hit? Or both?

Where does the responibility lie?

bija · February 21, 2007

SBS World News <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Australia</st1:place></st1:country-region> http://worldnewsaustralia.com.au

<st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">UK</st1:place></st1:country-region> 'not cutting and running'

The Howard government says <st1:country-region w:st="on">Britain</st1:country-region> is not cutting and running by deciding to start pulling its troops out of <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Iraq</st1:place></st1:country-region>.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair told US President George W Bush he will begin pulling <st1:country-region w:st="on">Britain</st1:country-region>'s 7,100 troops out of <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Iraq</st1:place></st1:country-region> - reportedly within weeks.

Although Mr Blair has yet to confirm details, news reports in Britain say Mr Blair will announce the first contingent of 1,500 troops will leave Iraq in a matter of weeks, and a further 1,500 will follow by the end of the year.

Australian Defence Minister Brendan Nelson played down the significance of the expected announcement and said it was a sign of progress in southern <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Iraq</st1:place></st1:country-region>, where most British troops are based.

"Under no circumstances should anybody interpret the British having 5,000 troops in <st1:City w:st="on">Basra</st1:City>, 10 times the Australian number, looking after the same number of provinces, as any kind of cut and run," he told reporters in <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Perth</st1:place></st1:City>.

"In fact, what this is evidence of is the fact that in the south of <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Iraq</st1:place></st1:country-region> we are making progress and the British are confident enough to reduce their troop numbers to around 5,000."

The Howard government has refused to set a deadline for the withdrawal of <st1:country-region w:st="on">Australia</st1:country-region>'s 1,400 troops in <st1:country-region w:st="on">Iraq</st1:country-region>, many of them also based in southern <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Iraq</st1:place></st1:country-region>.