Redstate

By Pejman Yousefzadeh Posted in War — Comments (8) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

But I just don't think that this is a good idea:

Intent on demonstrating progress in Iraq, the top U.S. general there is expected by Bush administration officials to recommend removing American troops soon from several areas where commanders believe security has improved, possibly including Al Anbar province.

According to the officials, Gen. David H. Petraeus is expected to propose the partial pullback in his September status report to Congress, when both the war's critics and supporters plan to reassess its course. Administration officials who support the current troop levels hope Petraeus' recommendations will persuade Congress to reject pressure for a major U.S. withdrawal.

The expected recommendation would authorize U.S. commanders to withdraw troops from places that have become less violent and turn over security responsibilities to Iraqi forces.

But it does not necessarily follow that Petraeus would call for reducing the overall number of troops in the country. Instead, he could move them to another hot spot, or use them to create a reserve force to counter any rise in violence.

"That is the form of the recommendation we are anticipating him to come back with," a senior administration official said. But referring to the redeployment options, the official added, "I just don't know which of those categories he is going to be in."

Read on . . .

David Petraeus knows a heck of a lot more than I do about what is going on in Iraq. That much goes without saying. And it is perfectly reasonable to think that some troops might be removed from places like Al Anbar and redeployed elsewhere.

At the same time, while we have made a great deal of progress in Anbar and Diyala, I can't believe that our work is done there. I have to imagine that there remains an al Qaeda force in Anbar that needs to be completely cornered and defeated and I would argue--at least from what I am hearing in the news--that now is not the best time to let al Qaeda out of that corner. I think that Maj. Gen. Walter Gaskin makes a good point:

Not all military commanders favor reducing the number of troops in more stable areas. In a news conference last month, Marine Maj. Gen. Walter E. Gaskin, the commander of U.S. forces in Al Anbar, cautioned against cutting back forces there too quickly.

Gaskin argued that the added forces had allowed the Marines to eliminate havens used by the insurgent group that calls itself Al Qaeda in Iraq.

A "persistent presence" of U.S. forces, he said, would help give Iraqi security forces more experience and confidence, and the ability to keep militants out.

"It takes time to gain experience," he said. "I see that experience happening every day, but I don't see it happening overnight. I believe it's another couple of years in order to get them to do that -- and that's not a political answer, that's a military answer."

Of course, I trust that Petraeus will do well and do good in Iraq. I certainly think highly of his skills and talents, whatever minor disagreements I might have with some tactics. Disagreements are unavoidable, after all. But I have to believe that a continued presence in places like Al Anbar is advisable. And I have to believe that Petraeus is basing his tactical decisions in part on what he fears Congress might do if he doesn't recommend some kind of troop pullback. I don't necessarily blame him for that. But it may not be the objectively best tactic to pursue.