Projo 7 to 7 News BlogTaking the news pulse of Rhode Island and Southeastern Massachusetts, by Providence Journal and projo.com staff, from 7 to 7, every business day |
|
Get the 7 to 7 on your mobile at www.projo.com. Twitter: projo | RSS | Email alerts
« Adult Ed centers offers job skills, help with placement |
Main
| Update: 911 tape of gas blast: 'We can hear it hissing' »
WASHINGTON -- Rep. James R. Langevin expressed concern today about President Obama's plan to leave as many as 50,000 U.S. troops in Iraq after a pullout of combat troops to conclude by Sept. 1, 2010. In a news release, Langevin, a member of the House Armed Services Committee who opposed the U.S. invasion of Iraq, reiterated his earlier praise for Mr. Obama's development of a troop withdrawal plan. He added that ``the best way to demonstrate our support'' for the troops ``is by welcoming them home.'' But Langevin echored reservations by some Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill when he pronounced himself ``concerned about the high number of troops remaining as part of the 'transition force'.'' Earlier this week, Democratic Senators Jack Reed and Sheldon Whitehouse both endorsed Mr. Obama's emerging plan for removing American troops from Iraq on a somewhat slower timetable than he had set during his presidential campaign. Last year Mr. Obama promised to remove U.S. troops from Iraq at the rate of one combat brigades at the rate of one per month from the time he took office until the beginnning of June, 2010, leaving behind a residual force of unspecified size. During the campaign, Mr. Obama kept open the option of changing the plan based on assessments of security conditions in Iraq. Today at Camp Lejeune, N.C., the president unveiled a plan that differed from his campaign pledge in two respects. First was the later date for concluding his withdrawal of combat troops, who number about 142,000 today. Second was the decision to keep most of those departing troops in Iraq through the end of this year. The bulk of the pullout will thus be accomplished between Jan. 1 and Aug. 31 next year. Between 35,000 and 50,000 troops would remain for counterterrorism, training Iraqi forces and protecting Iraqi civilians. Although Mr. Obama had said during the campaign that he would retain a U.S. force for such purposes, some Democratic leaders expressed surprise when the president gave them the figures yesterday. In a conference call today with reporters, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said the president's decision was bassed on the desire of U.S. military leaders to retain a ``maximum force'' this year, while Iraq completes local elections nationwide and the government and populace absorbs the results of the voting. Reed said Mr. Obama's new troop withdrawal plan falls "well within the range" of Mr. Obama's earlier, 16-month schedule and the somewhat longer timetable negotiated last year between the Iraqi government and the Bush administration, Reed said. That ``status of forces'' agreement between former President Bush and Iraq's leaders requires all American troops to leave Iraq by the end of 2011. The size of the force that Mr. Obama now plans to leave in Iraq is also well within the range of estimates that Reed, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, has given for many months. Whitehouse, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said of Mr. Obama's new plan: "The general trend is the important thing," Whitehouse said. "So far, so good." After voicing his concern about the plan in his statement today, Langevin added, ``However, I do not want to reverse any of the gains we have achieved and will examine all the options that will help maintain stability in Iraq.'' He said he looks forward to learning more about the troop withdrawal plan. |
|
|
|
Leave a comment
Please be civil. Vicious comments, personal attacks and profanity won't be published. Name and email are required; email address will not publish.