-Caveat Lector-

Relief for U.S. troops lacking
By Tom Squitieri, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON - The Pentagon's search for troops from other nations to replace U.S.
soldiers in the force that is stabilizing postwar Iraq has fallen short of
expectations, and U.S. officials face the prospect of keeping more U.S. forces
in Iraq than they had hoped, diplomats and military officials say.

  A U.S. military police officer keeps an eye a crowd in Baghdad while other MPs
arrest Iraqis who fired guns in the air.
By Victor Caivano, AP

Despite efforts to prod other nations to send troops - and a United Nations
resolution on May 22 that cleared the way for countries to begin contributing
soldiers to the postwar effort - the United States and Britain have gotten
promises of just 13,000 troops from two dozen countries, according to diplomats
for the affected countries. The first significant arrivals could come in July.

That's much fewer than the tens of thousands of troops U.S. planners want. There
are about 150,000 U.S. troops and 15,000 British troops in Iraq, along with a
smattering of soldiers from other nations. Pentagon officials had hoped to begin
substituting troops from other countries for some U.S. troops as early as next
month, when they had expected to send home most of the Army's 3rd Infantry
Division, which will now stay on.

Getting help from foreign troops is important for reasons beyond sending home
battle-weary U.S. forces. The Bush administration would like to put a more
multinational face on the occupation of Iraq by visibly involving a broader
group of nations. Foreign help also could cut U.S. costs at a time when U.S.
planners are facing an open-ended military mission in Afghanistan plus other
operations in the war against terrorism.

In a speech Tuesday to the Council on Foreign Relations, Defense Secretary
Donald Rumsfeld said 39 nations have contributed to the stabilization force or
"provided other assistance." But the Pentagon will not specify which nations are
contributing troops, or how many have been promised.

In his speech, Rumsfeld also said many U.S. troops will be required "for as long
as it takes" to create a secure atmosphere in Iraq.

The United Sates is getting enthusiastic help from Poland. Polish officials said
they are determined to take a lead role in the military security of Iraq as well
as demonstrate to the United States and other NATO nations that it can be a good
ally.

In Warsaw, 15 nations took part last week in talks on the force for Iraq. Polish
officials said they received commitments from enough nations to fill out a
7,000-strong force for a sector of Iraq they will command.

Several countries the United States was hoping would send large numbers of
troops now say they can contribute small groups for a short period of time. For
example, Denmark says it was asked for 5,000 troops but will send 380.

Other nations that have participated in peacekeeping missions elsewhere have
declined to send troops because public opinion in their countries heavily
opposed the U.S. invasion and continues to oppose postwar U.S.-British control.
There are other snags:

NATO is preparing a force of 5,500 troops for peacekeeping duties in
Afghanistan. That is drawing European troops who might have helped in Iraq.
Worse-than-expected postwar lawlessness and violence in Iraq have forced U.S.
planners to keep more troops there, and have increased the anxiety of some
nations about committing their forces.
Some nations have few soldiers to send or a lack of money to pay for any
significant deployment.
Britain's 15,000 troops still in Iraq are down from 45,000 during the war, and
Britain has said it will continue to reduce the size of its force.

British Defense Minister Geoffrey Hoon said in an interview that a long
occupation would severely strain Britain's small military. "It is fair to say we
are stretched," Hoon said.


© Copyright 2003 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.

www.ctrl.org
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!   These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:

http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to