Brit Withdrawal IS NOT News

As you'll see below, the alleged big news today of a Brit withdrawal from Iraq is not really news. It actually appears to be less than was planned months ago. And pardon me for yet once again pointing out what an idiot Glenn Greenwald is while making the point.

You can click through to read Greenwald's latest on Blair's withdrawing of troops, or read the MSNBC version distortion here. But I'll post all you need to know.

Greeted with news that Blair is removing 1,500 troops in some number of weeks, Greenwald and the MSM are treating it like big news.

First Greenwald quotes Blair in the LA Times on Jan. 24:

Prime Minister Tony Blair rejected calls Wednesday to withdraw British forces from Iraq by October

Then he quotes Blair from today, suggesting it is a shocking reversal and a slap at Bush's surge - which it absolutely is not in both cases. "That rather striking reversal does not appear to reflect much confidence in the prospects of success for the President's Glorious AEI Surge"

Prime Minister Tony Blair will announce on Wednesday a new timetable for the withdrawal of British troops from Iraq, with 1,500 to return home in several weeks, the BBC reported.

Blair will also tell the House of Commons during his regular weekly appearance before it that a total of about 3,000 British soldiers will have left southern Iraq by the end of 2007, if the security there is sufficient

Now check out Blair via the Beeb on January 11, 2007:

Tony Blair has lost no time in signalling that President Bush's plans for a troop "surge" in Iraq will have no effect on British moves to gradually reduce force numbers in the country.

Indeed, all the talk in Westminster now is around speculation that the draw down of up to 3,000 UK troops may be under way by May - in the weeks leading up to the prime minister's expected retirement day.

The aim of these two developments is to seek to reassure voters that, whatever the US does, it will not lead to an increase in British involvement in the country or blow the government's plans off course.

Ministers are eager to point out, as Mr Blair reminded the Cabinet on Thursday morning, that conditions on the ground in the UK's zone of operation in Basra are entirely different from those in Baghdad, which is the focus of the US movement.

It's a non-story, just as Greenwald is a non-entity when it comes to his having an objective, or fully informed opinion.

Comments

[Capitalist Infidel]

How does Greenwald still have any readers after having his credibility shredded by the sock puppet incident?

[Dan Riehl]

He's a Lib, since when does integrity matter to them?

[Hard Right]

Of course it isn't news. However, it allows the leftist MSM to push their doom and gloom campaign. As usual, honest reporting is alien to the left.

BTW, here's a link about this very thing...from 2005

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/04/03/nirq03.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/04/03/ixnewstop.html

Here's a story fron 2006 about British troop withdrawl.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/03/13/uk.iraq/index.html

[91B30]

Meh-southern Iraq is pretty much all Shia and the Brits haven't had too much of a tough time there. Depending on the local part of the country we've turned over some operations to the IA. It'd be better if they would move their forces to reinforce us, but if they feel comfortable turning operations over to the IA they're in the best position to know what's appropriate.

[Darth Malice]

Brits did a good job,they deserve nothing but praise.

[LOL]

however u need to spin it dan

[warrenb]

So Basra is safe now?...so thats why their leaving? And you said and confirmed Baghdad is still bad right and in need of tighter security? Why don't they just move them to Baghdad then and not leave the entire Country? Sorry but the way you put this is a spinning wheel going 1000mph. Why don't you just admit this looks bad for the US? Your continuance to defend and protect this Administrations stance is amusing at best and a bit silly don't you think? When will it ever end?

There could be one of our soldiers left in Iraq after all others had been killed and you would stand there waving your tiny plastic American Flag saying "Go get er done, boy!".

One word for you Dan,

MORON!

[Legalize]

I just think that it's funny that winger bloggers continue to bash Glenn Greenwald as being not "fully informed," or "objective," without every pointing to how and why this is the case - almost as funny as Dan Riehl, Charles Johnson, Michelle Malkin, and the rest of the winger welfare cases, claiming to have ANY credibilty on ANY issue they are paid by their handlers to spin.

The simple truth of the UK troop withdrawal is that this war destroyed Tony Blair's political career; the war is and always has been tremendously unpopular in that country; and Blair is simply "cutting and running" in order to salvage some small part of his legacy - just like Bush will do in 6 to 9 months. The noise machine will spin that as some great victory as well, all while being forced to accept St. John Mccain as their nominee. Laugh. Out. Loud.

[Devil's Advocate]

Riehl is a non-entity when it comes to his having an objective, or fully informed opinion.

"Your continuance to defend and protect this Administrations stance is amusing at best and a bit silly don't you think? When will it ever end?" Alas, never, WARRENB. Fanatics follow their leaders no matter what. Riehl is no different from an Islamic fanatic, or any other kind of fanatic the world over. These robots do not have one critical brain cell between their ears.

[Devil's Advocate]

"Asked about Tony Blair’s announcement today that the U.K. will cut troop levels in Iraq by 1,600 — from 7,100 down to 5,500 — Vice President Dick Cheney “said the move was actually good news and a sign of progress in Iraq.” Later in the day, he told a group of U.S. troops, “I want you to know that the American people will not support a policy of retreat.”"

If anything, one has to admire Tricky Dick's ability to speak from both sides of his mouth.

[aLiberal]

if it's not "good news," then it must be "non-news," right, guys?

[ME]

"It's a non-story, just as Greenwald is a non-entity when it comes to his having an objective, or fully informed opinion."

You write about non-stories all the time, and you most certainly do not have an objective, or fully informed opinion (in fact you are very poorly informed at times, such as now).

In this case, the reversal Greenwald mentions is about having a timetable, not whether to pull out or not. Once again, a conservative with awful reading comprehension tries to understand something, and fails. What a surprise.

Everyone makes mistakes here and there, but you aren't really fit to lick Greenwald's boots, which is why it makes you giddy to pretend that you "got" him.

[BobInStamford]

The Coalition of the Willing (the funniest damn name ever) is surging. However, they are surging out of Iraq. You heros are on your own now!

[Von Cracker]

Nothing to see here...all is well. Because Riehl said so...

Funny you still get paid to promote lies and un-truths on the TV, since your credibility has been shot to hell - for a long time now. You, and your ilk, have been consistantly wrong about EVERYTHING in regards to the GWOT, Iraq, and the overall mood of this country.

At least Greenwald backs up his analysis and opinions with references. You? It's all from the gut. Isn't that right?

VC

[David M]

Trackbacked by The Thunder Run - Web Reconnaissance for 02/21/2007
A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention.

[Kite]

It's not a retreat or a withdrawal.

Blair's only reducing the numbers to 5,500 and then a number of those troops will remain at the Palace of Basra and the others will be relocated to the air-base to be called in as support if need be.

This isn't bad news for Bush because Blair himself said he is confident that the Iraqi government can sustain peace and hold the three cities that the British are handing over to them. It means, actually, that the "Spread freedom to Iraq" might actually be working.

But you Dems are just hoping it fails and the country implodes...then you'll have a reason to bitch. Am I right? Yeah, i'm right,

[Devil's Advocate]

"Blair himself said he is confident that the Iraqi government can sustain peace and hold the three cities that the British are handing over to them."

Well, if Blair says so, it must be true. Not that Blair would ever lie or anything...

[Devil's Advocate]

"But you Dems are just hoping it [Spread Freedom to Iraq] fails and the country implodes..."

First, it was the WMDs. Then it was the non-existent links between Hussein and Al-Qaeda. Then it was removing an evil dictator. Then it was spread democracy in the ME. So, now it is spread freedom in Iraq? Or have I missed the latest version of the story?

Whatever the story is, it has failed miserably. Bush's ill-advised policy has succeeded in putting in place a Shia government propped by a thug -- Al-Sadr -- and his militia, and with close ties to Iran. Another heck of a job brought to you by the Cheney/Neo-con Corporation. Just in case you have not noticed the bombs, cars, and trucks, exploding every single day, several times a day, across Baghdad and the rest of Iraq, Iraq has already imploded.

Hundreds of thousands people killed and wounded (including our troops sent to serve as IED fodder), millions of Iraqis in exile, and a few hundred billion dollars wasted later, the right-wingers are still adamant about the "stay the course" strategy to "spread freedom to Iraq". The very definition of insanity is to keep on doing the same thing while expecting a different outcome. Fortunately, a majority of Americans have come to their senses. The right-wingers, blinded by their fanaticism, will follow the leader over the cliff.

[Robert]

Devil's Advocate,

You forgot the part about how they support the troops.
Saw the piece about Walter Reed Hospital in the Post this week, so that one's now on the backburner as well.

They drop their lies when the light shines bright, don't they?

[Carl Gordon]

Perhaps, in a separate, Bizarro universe, where I could see the future before the present, and my reticular, 4th dimensional, particle-level, photon-realized self representation would inform my past implemented time actualized "self" that a Bush or DICK informed me of their future intentions at a ensuing time coordinate that I was not molecularly tangible at, then it all makes sense. But everything out of their mouths have that dim whiff of mendacity and all the shills standing behind them in the background grinning and nodding in concurrence have all the clout of a three card monty swindle. Jeez, the guys plead that the dog ate their homework so many times why bother sucking the oxygen out of the room when going on about responsibility, why don’t they just say fornicate off. I don’t care how hard core conservative you are or if you particularly like getting intercoursed in the backside as a patriotic act, these guys are picking your wallet, kneeing you in the nads, and then asking for a fee and an apology!

You can add the Bush administration to the list of accurately horrible and evil things (nuns, Spam, cops, the moral majority, Mariah Carey, Adam Sandler, catheters, Catholics, Budweiser, Will and Grace, boy bands, Kincaid paintings, patriotism, Tim Russert, Denny’s, spaghetti-o’s, North Dakota, fraternities, East Orange New Jersey, port-a-johns, etc.,). I suppose it could be worse (I could be working for the 7-up bottling company).

[Robert]

I'll tell you what, Dan.

Let's get all the troops back here safely, then when you write your spin about how Bush was right all along, we can still feel good that at least no more soldiers are being killed while you spin your lies.

How's today sound?

[Ron]

Just stumbled on to your site and I must say that it's honestly funny to see someone so adamently defending his party line. I actually saw that you had a couple of readers but then after perusing the comments, it appears they for the most part disagree with your position, or just think you are an idiot. I disagree with your position and think you are an idiot.

[Tom]

Just stumbled on to your site and I must say that it's honestly funny to see someone so adamently defending his party line. I actually saw that you had a couple of readers but then after perusing the comments, it appears they for the most part disagree with your position, or just think you are an idiot. I disagree with your position and think you are an idiot.

Posted by: Ron

Ron, this blog could use all the wisdom it can find - so welcome! You are right about Dan.

[gil]

Answer to Rhiel.

You need a refresher on your talking points from the White House. You sound rather pathetic with your ; No Brits No problem theory.

Just about every one in the so called "Coalition of the willing" is getting ready to live by '08 at the latest. Say, Are you not Right Wingers, the ones that say that time tables are not good because it gives comfort to the enemy?

Is 08 not a time deadline? .... So what gives are the Brits now "Cutting and Running " ?

You Right Wingers sound really sealy this days.... Like I said you are in a bad need of new and improved talking points.

You attacked every one that dared to say let's talk to North Korea... Next thing you know Bush talks to North Korea and gives away the store to North Korea. You Right Wingers for years supported Bush in his Iraq Policies, only to see him fire Rumsfeld, and publically admit that mistakes were made and that a change in strategy was needed. You defended Bush's B.S. about the "we are winning in Iraq" only to see him change his mind and say "we are not loosing in Iraq". You supported the talking point that we can't set a time table to live Iraq because the enemy will waith us out, only to see all of our allies set clear deadlines to live Iraq. And now you support the stupid surge....

You Right WIngers make me laugh... You guys have the Jail Bitch Syndrome.

[gil]

Rhiel.

I don't want you to feel bad or anithing... But does any one from the Right actually reads your blog?

Maibe you need to start paying some one to at list put up some pro-Right Wing posts you know, becaue this is looking like a Democratic get together and you are paying the bill!!

You are OK man. Some other Right Wing blogs that in their disgrace end up at Salon put three fire walls to stop Democrats from posting their comments. Nothing like the conviction to fight for what you believe right Right WIngers? But like I said, you Rhiel at least have the courage to face the music, and that makes you better than your coward fellow Right Wing bloggers.

Keep up the good work.... And get out from the dark side!!!

[rick freedman]

what a hoot to see the ridiculous self-serving nonsense of Riehl and his (diminishing) chorus of True Believers outnumbered by the Reality-based Community. For more reality, take a look at Juan Cole's comments on the UK withdrawal here (http://www.juancole.com/2007/02/blair-to-draw-down-british-troops-tony.html ).

Sorry, Dan, but it's just internally inconsistent. If the UK still believes in 'the mission', and believes they've pacified the south (notwithstanding the constant influx of Iranian weapons and influence to this region), why not stay and secure the border or contribute to the security of the Iraqi people? If the Coalition of the Willing was such an important element of this war, and not just a prop for Bush's premeditated aggression, why are they booking for the hills now? tell me, is this 'the last throes' of the insurgency? Is Iran the new Zarqawi ("If we could just take care of this last little problem, everything will be peachy")? Are 21,500 troops really going to turn the tide in this, Civilizations Last Stand? Isd there any lie you won't believe - or, more importantly, peddle?

Just a little note - 'fisk'-ing an opponent's views (dissecting their opinions and demonstrating that they're incorrect) - takes a bit more than name-calling. Rather than asserting that your ideological opponents are ill-informed, or idiots, or non-objective, or non-entities, you might try demonstrating it with facts. Don't strain yourself.

Since you seem to be getting more laughing liberals than right-wing know-nothings, maybe you're doing a Steven Colbert - just pretending to be a dolt!

[HighPlainsJoker]

I agree with gil, and am testing the firewall theory with this. So many of the rightie republics do "firewall" their comments sections. I complained to Salon about it, but don't see much change.

[Devil's Advocate]

Robert,

You are correct. All these right-wing fanatics "support the troops" but I have yet to see one of their posts expressing outrage at the neglect and disdain shown by the Pentagon (and therefore the Commander-in-Chief) to the wounded soldiers who have the misfortune of being treated as outpatients at Walter Reede. Gee! The silence from the right is deafening.

[Jon G]

If we're surging, which most war supporters seem to admit has to succede, and the Brits have extra troops, why aren't they being sent up to help with the Surge? That seems the most logical course - or is there something else going on here?

[Officious_Pedant]

Oops. You blew it again, dude.

http://www.cfr.org/publication/12692/knights.html?breadcrumb=%2Fpublication%2Fpublication_list%3Ftype%3Dinterview

Seems Basra isn't the Disneyland of Iraq.