http://au.news.yahoo.com/070220/19/12hnl.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Wednesday February 21, 10:28 AM
<b>Blair to announce Iraq troop withdrawal: reports</b>
Photo : AFPÂ
LONDON (AFP) - British Prime Minister Tony Blair will announce on Wednesday that thousands of his country's troops are to begin withdrawing from Iraq in weeks, according to media reports confirmed by the White House.
According to The Sun and The Times, Blair will say that the first contingent of 1,500 troops will leave the war-torn country and arrive back in Britain in a matter of weeks, and a further 1,500 will follow by the end of the year.
White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe, meanwhile, confirmed that Blair told US President George W. Bush Tuesday of his plans for troop withdrawal.
"We view this as a success," Johndroe said, suggesting the British move was a sign of increasing stabilization in Iraq. <!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo--> (Not sure about this at all, in face of all the insurgency witnessed.)
"They spoke about this this morning on the phone," he said.
Blair is set to appear before parliament on Wednesday for his weekly half-hour question-and-answer session.
According to the press reports, Blair will say that Operation Sinbad -- involving attempts by British and Iraqi troops to secure the southern town of Basra from insurgents -- has been a success, but will also stress that hopes for a withdrawal are conditional on signs that Iraqi forces are able to take over.
A spokesman for Blair's Downing Street office would not confirm or deny the report, but told AFP: "The prime minister said he will update parliament first about these matters, and it's right that he does that."
Britain's apparent decision to pull troops out of Iraq comes soon after Bush announced he would send 21,500 extra combat troops to the country, on top of the 138,000 US soldiers already there.
Britain has about 7,100 troops in Iraq, most of them based around Basra. It is the second-largest foreign contingent of soldiers after that of the United States.
In an interview with the BBC on Sunday, Blair rejected suggestions that he should bear responsibility for the sectarian violence in Iraq, but said Britain and the United States had a duty to bring it to an end.
He said in the interview that Washington was not pressurising London to maintain its troop levels and recognised that the security situation was different in British-run Basra than in Baghdad.
The United Nations said in January that at least 34,452 Iraqis died across the country and another 36,685 were wounded in 2006.
A total of 132 British troops have died since the start of the US-led invasion in March 2003 while there have been 3,127 US military fatalities in the same period, according to an AFP count based on Pentagon figures.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Watched a BBC programme on how British troops were doing in Iraq and what the Iraqis thought of their presence. Granted, the sample could well have been biased to make people in Britain feel good about their army's presence there.
The interviewed Iraqi populace, old and young men and women as well as teenage children spoke (with translators or in English) and they all unanimously said similar things: they don't fear the British troops (whom they view as peacekeepers). They fear the Americans, because the Americans act like oppressive hooligans. One kid among a group of Iraqi kids said that the Americans were mean to them (children), whereas the Brits played with them. There was even footage of a Brit soldier playing goodnaturedly with a kid, other soldiers smiling. It was really nice to see that side of Iraq.
I feel sorry for the Iraqi populace who will have fewer British soliders and will have to face more US troops (brainwashed to treat Iraqis as dust, like the Americans who went to Vietnam were brainwashed to treat all Vietnamese including S Vietnamese in an abominable manner).
Better even than British troops would have been Australian or NZ peacekeepers. Everyone likes them a lot, because they are friendly, kind, non-threatening and in countries like Fiji, they are instantly recognised as helpers.
http://au.news.yahoo.com/070221/2/12hp2.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Wednesday February 21, 12:31 PM
<b>Britain not cutting and running: Nelson</b>
The Howard government denies Britain is cutting and running by deciding to start pulling its troops out of Iraq.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair has told US President George W Bush he will begin pulling Britain's 7,100 troops out of Iraq - 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 Iraq, where most British troops are based.
"Under no circumstances should anybody interpret the British having 5,000 troops in Basra, 10 times the Australian number, looking after the same number of provinces, as any kind of cut and run," he told reporters in Perth.
"In fact, what this is evidence of is the fact that in the south of Iraq 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 Australia's 1,400 troops in Iraq, many of them also based in southern Iraq.
Foreign Minister Alexander Downer said Britain was reducing, not withdrawing, its troops from Iraq.
"The British government are reducing their troops numbers in Iraq," he told reporters in Perth.
"They will be leaving several thousand troops in Iraq and the important point to make here is the British are not withdrawing from Iraq.
"The British want to have more of a program that is consistent with what our troops are doing in Tallil, that's what they're doing.
"They're not withdrawing."
Earlier, Mr Downer described the British move as good sense.
He said coalition forces were keen to transfer security to the Iraqis as soon as possible.
"It makes good sense," he told ABC Radio.
"What we are all trying to do is increasingly transfer responsibility for the security to the Iraqi security forces."<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now, moving on to <b>Afghanistan</b>, a different view emerges (bit in red):
http://au.news.yahoo.com/070220/23/12hds.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Tuesday February 20, 06:15 PM
<b>PM says Rudd is full of himself</b>
By 7News
Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd has launched a personal attack on Prime Minister John Howard, describing him as a risk to Australia's national security.
Mr Rudd is enjoying an extended honeymoon with voters after receiving a big boost in the latest opinion polls.
"Mr Howard is looming as an increasing risk for Australia's long-term national security," Mr Rudd said.
"I think he's getting a bit full of himself," Mr Howard replied.
Today's Newspoll gives Mr Rudd a record 68 per cent approval rating and a 10-point lead over Mr Howard as preferred PM.
But Labor's two-party-preferred lead fell to eight points.
"It just makes me want to work harder for the Australian people," Mr Howard said.
While the debate over troops in Iraq rages on another front is opening.
Afghan Ambassador to Australia, Mohammad Anwar Anwarzai, told 7News he wants more Australian troops for his country.
"If some more elements, some more troops could be sent to Afghanistan for reconstruction purposes they are most welcome," he said.
"We would like to see them until the job is done."<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Afghan government want Aus troops to stay and what's more, wants some more to be sent. The Afghan government also wants Pak to stay out of Afghan business, accusing Pak of trying to sabotage the emerging stability, development and reconstruction of Afghanistan.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Wednesday February 21, 10:28 AM
<b>Blair to announce Iraq troop withdrawal: reports</b>
Photo : AFPÂ
LONDON (AFP) - British Prime Minister Tony Blair will announce on Wednesday that thousands of his country's troops are to begin withdrawing from Iraq in weeks, according to media reports confirmed by the White House.
According to The Sun and The Times, Blair will say that the first contingent of 1,500 troops will leave the war-torn country and arrive back in Britain in a matter of weeks, and a further 1,500 will follow by the end of the year.
White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe, meanwhile, confirmed that Blair told US President George W. Bush Tuesday of his plans for troop withdrawal.
"We view this as a success," Johndroe said, suggesting the British move was a sign of increasing stabilization in Iraq. <!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo--> (Not sure about this at all, in face of all the insurgency witnessed.)
"They spoke about this this morning on the phone," he said.
Blair is set to appear before parliament on Wednesday for his weekly half-hour question-and-answer session.
According to the press reports, Blair will say that Operation Sinbad -- involving attempts by British and Iraqi troops to secure the southern town of Basra from insurgents -- has been a success, but will also stress that hopes for a withdrawal are conditional on signs that Iraqi forces are able to take over.
A spokesman for Blair's Downing Street office would not confirm or deny the report, but told AFP: "The prime minister said he will update parliament first about these matters, and it's right that he does that."
Britain's apparent decision to pull troops out of Iraq comes soon after Bush announced he would send 21,500 extra combat troops to the country, on top of the 138,000 US soldiers already there.
Britain has about 7,100 troops in Iraq, most of them based around Basra. It is the second-largest foreign contingent of soldiers after that of the United States.
In an interview with the BBC on Sunday, Blair rejected suggestions that he should bear responsibility for the sectarian violence in Iraq, but said Britain and the United States had a duty to bring it to an end.
He said in the interview that Washington was not pressurising London to maintain its troop levels and recognised that the security situation was different in British-run Basra than in Baghdad.
The United Nations said in January that at least 34,452 Iraqis died across the country and another 36,685 were wounded in 2006.
A total of 132 British troops have died since the start of the US-led invasion in March 2003 while there have been 3,127 US military fatalities in the same period, according to an AFP count based on Pentagon figures.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Watched a BBC programme on how British troops were doing in Iraq and what the Iraqis thought of their presence. Granted, the sample could well have been biased to make people in Britain feel good about their army's presence there.
The interviewed Iraqi populace, old and young men and women as well as teenage children spoke (with translators or in English) and they all unanimously said similar things: they don't fear the British troops (whom they view as peacekeepers). They fear the Americans, because the Americans act like oppressive hooligans. One kid among a group of Iraqi kids said that the Americans were mean to them (children), whereas the Brits played with them. There was even footage of a Brit soldier playing goodnaturedly with a kid, other soldiers smiling. It was really nice to see that side of Iraq.
I feel sorry for the Iraqi populace who will have fewer British soliders and will have to face more US troops (brainwashed to treat Iraqis as dust, like the Americans who went to Vietnam were brainwashed to treat all Vietnamese including S Vietnamese in an abominable manner).
Better even than British troops would have been Australian or NZ peacekeepers. Everyone likes them a lot, because they are friendly, kind, non-threatening and in countries like Fiji, they are instantly recognised as helpers.
http://au.news.yahoo.com/070221/2/12hp2.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Wednesday February 21, 12:31 PM
<b>Britain not cutting and running: Nelson</b>
The Howard government denies Britain is cutting and running by deciding to start pulling its troops out of Iraq.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair has told US President George W Bush he will begin pulling Britain's 7,100 troops out of Iraq - 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 Iraq, where most British troops are based.
"Under no circumstances should anybody interpret the British having 5,000 troops in Basra, 10 times the Australian number, looking after the same number of provinces, as any kind of cut and run," he told reporters in Perth.
"In fact, what this is evidence of is the fact that in the south of Iraq 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 Australia's 1,400 troops in Iraq, many of them also based in southern Iraq.
Foreign Minister Alexander Downer said Britain was reducing, not withdrawing, its troops from Iraq.
"The British government are reducing their troops numbers in Iraq," he told reporters in Perth.
"They will be leaving several thousand troops in Iraq and the important point to make here is the British are not withdrawing from Iraq.
"The British want to have more of a program that is consistent with what our troops are doing in Tallil, that's what they're doing.
"They're not withdrawing."
Earlier, Mr Downer described the British move as good sense.
He said coalition forces were keen to transfer security to the Iraqis as soon as possible.
"It makes good sense," he told ABC Radio.
"What we are all trying to do is increasingly transfer responsibility for the security to the Iraqi security forces."<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now, moving on to <b>Afghanistan</b>, a different view emerges (bit in red):
http://au.news.yahoo.com/070220/23/12hds.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Tuesday February 20, 06:15 PM
<b>PM says Rudd is full of himself</b>
By 7News
Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd has launched a personal attack on Prime Minister John Howard, describing him as a risk to Australia's national security.
Mr Rudd is enjoying an extended honeymoon with voters after receiving a big boost in the latest opinion polls.
"Mr Howard is looming as an increasing risk for Australia's long-term national security," Mr Rudd said.
"I think he's getting a bit full of himself," Mr Howard replied.
Today's Newspoll gives Mr Rudd a record 68 per cent approval rating and a 10-point lead over Mr Howard as preferred PM.
But Labor's two-party-preferred lead fell to eight points.
"It just makes me want to work harder for the Australian people," Mr Howard said.
While the debate over troops in Iraq rages on another front is opening.
Afghan Ambassador to Australia, Mohammad Anwar Anwarzai, told 7News he wants more Australian troops for his country.
"If some more elements, some more troops could be sent to Afghanistan for reconstruction purposes they are most welcome," he said.
"We would like to see them until the job is done."<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Afghan government want Aus troops to stay and what's more, wants some more to be sent. The Afghan government also wants Pak to stay out of Afghan business, accusing Pak of trying to sabotage the emerging stability, development and reconstruction of Afghanistan.