Yet I have sympathy for the view of those who worry that we are planning to draw down our combat forces in Iraq too soon. I've mentioned this worry already as this possibility becomes real.
And this Weekly Standard blog piece repeats the basic concern: as we stand up Iraqi army units, rather than stand down our units, we should use them to attack the enemy and break them down.
Yet I can't shake the feeling that this is similar to other helpful suggestions in that they are suggesting we do what we are already doing. Consider that our troops strength has not dropped even as we've stood up Iraqi units. We are simply not replacing them depsite the fear of some that we will pull out too soon. The fact that we have been able to deploy units to go after the enemy in al Anbar in a persistent fashion the last several months demonstrates that we are not standing down as Iraqis stand up. If we were, we might have stood down 60-70,000 troops by now.
The Weekly Standard piece says we need to hit the enemy with the extra forces. We are doing this. As we atomize the enemy out west and Iraqi units come in behind us to pacify population centers, at some point we simply won't need to keep as many units in Iraq since we won't have targets for offensive action. We will be able to start pulling units out without relinquishing the edge we have to maintain the initiative and go after the enemy.
Clearly, as we've deployed Iraqi units we have not pulled out our units thus far. It is a theoretical worry that we will draw down prematurely. I just don't know where we stand as far as having more American units than we need to press the offensive, and therefore be able to afford to pull out units.
We'll see.
UPDATE: Ralph Peters is uneasy as well:
Perhaps we'll legitimately be able to draw down our forces below 100,000 by next summer. If so, we'll all be delighted. But if the situation continues to demand 120,000 troops or more, we need to focus on the mission — not on election-year special effects. Defeating terrorists is far more important than defeating Democrats (who are perfectly capable of defeating themselves).
Victory must always take priority over politics--for both parties.
