Italy: Prodi pledges withdrawal from Iraq

[Mangalore]

http://www.voanews.com/english/2006-04-27-voa41.cfm
German source: http://www.welt.de/data/2006/05/18/888884.html

Can a military operation with only two countries having more than several thousand troops in the area still be called a coalition?

With Italy now the last of the larger military contributors to Iraq aside of UK and USA withdraws its troops. With this act Prodi follows a promise he made during the elections and the years before as the military contribution of Italy was pushed through by Berlusconi against the public opinion of most Italians. This seems to be a similar development as in Spain but luckily without a terrorist act influencing public opinion and killing innocents.

I guess he Italian contribution is not so big as to have severe impact on the US/UK plans however I don't think it will help either. What I am wondering is how the British still enact any kind of control over the South of Iraq at all. Or is it more like the Shia having a firm grip on everything and so far saw no need to cause any significant trouble against the remaining British occupation troops? I wonder what happens when secterian violence continues to escalate. I kind of doubt there are really enough troops left in the south to keep control if things go south there.

[Lusted]

Things in the South are getting more difficult, the british helicopter shot down the other week suggests the insurgents in the south may have access to weaponry to take down helicopters, which will make things a lot more difficult as the british are heavily reliant on helicopters for safe travel in the south.

I was expecting an Italian withdrawal for a while, i knew that public opinion there was against the war, and it was fairly likely that this was going to happen once Prodi was elected. You cannot really call what is in Iraq a coalition, it is more like US, UK and a few allies. The original Coalition of the Willing was quite laughable given the amount of small or island nations part of it and how many major nations were not.

[Lusted]

I know they could do that before, but now it looks like they have more so helicopters, one of the main ways for the british to move around, are becoming more dangerous, so it will be more difficult for british troops.

[Erik]

Can a military operation with only two countries having more than several thousand troops in the area still be called a coalition?

I think the minimum requirement to be called a "coalition" is to have more than one member.
So I think even when US and UK are the only two left it's still a coalition.

What Italy does is to be expected.
Iraq is a lost war and everybody wil pull out eventually, even UK and US.

[Last Roman]

What Italy does is to be expected.
Iraq is a lost war and everybody wil pull out eventually, even UK and US.

well, technically, we won the war. Its the aftermath that we are having the problems with

[Mad Guitar Murphy]

well, technically, we won the war. Its the aftermath that we are having the problems with

the aftermath of the war? :original:

If the brits and americans leave Iraq will become sort of like afghanistan under the taliban so imo they'll stay for a long, long time.

[Erik]

well, technically, we won the war. Its the aftermath that we are having the problems with

You have only won the war when your enemies agree, just ask Hannibal.

[Wulf]

Congratulations to Mr. Prodi for being a conformist.

You have only won the war when your enemies agree, just ask Hannibal.

Who are the enemies? Saddam agrees, judging from his captivity.

[Erik]

Who are the enemies? Saddam agrees, judging from his captivity.

The "evil-do-ers".

[Last Roman]

You have only won the war when your enemies agree, just ask Hannibal.

the object of the war was to remove Saddam and his Baathist govermnet. We did so.

That said, it was a stupid and unnecessary goal

[Zenith Darksea]

Incidentally, I hear that the Taleban are doing rather well in Afghanistan these days. They've even started a rebellion!

[Sétanta]

Incidentally, I hear that the Taleban are doing rather well in Afghanistan these days. They've even started a rebellion!

The Taliban have been trying to rebel since they were removed.

[bigfootedfred]

Incidentally, I hear that the Taleban are doing rather well in Afghanistan these days. They've even started a rebellion!

Theres been fighting for quite some time now.
Only 2 days ago there was a major battle.

Up to 100 people have died in some of Afghanistan's fiercest fighting since US-led forces ousted the Taleban regime in 2001.
Taleban fighters are battling police in Helmand province where officials say 50 militants and 13 police died.

The Afghan governers blame pakistan

Afghan President Hamid Karzai blamed Pakistan's security forces for the fighting, saying they had encouraged insurgents to mount attacks.

Speaking in Kunar near the Pakistani border, he said the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) trained young Afghans to burn down schools and attack engineers working in construction.

Source: Major Afghan Battle

And meanwhile, The Pakistani Wing of the Taleban,

Haji Omar is the amir (chief) of the Pakistani Taleban
That have risen over the last year to take control of large parts of Waziristan (North Pakistan)
His writ runs virtually unchallenged in South Waziristan and he seems confident that his commanders will soon establish Taleban control in North Waziristan as well.

Source: Meeting Pakistan's Taleban chief

[Libertine]

well thats life - same thing happened in Russia......to Alex (was it the 3rd?)

[Zenith Darksea]

Well, the stated goal was to find WMD. Of course we all know that that was a lie, and we know that the administration knew (or should have known) that it was a lie at the time. It's a well-documented fact that, before going before the UN, Colin Powell said (in reference to the intelligence on WMD), "I'm not reading this; this is bull*****."

[Dirty Harry]

Leadership isn't about doing whatever public opinion polls tell you.

Another spineless European socialist makies decisions based on mob mentality, what a surprise.

Meanwhile his country continues to disintigrate economically and demographically.

Goodbye Italy, another country that has never liberated anyone, not even itself.

[RusskiSoldat]

well thats life - same thing happened in Russia......to Alex (was it the 3rd?)

Alexander III of Russia died of alcoholism aged around 50.
Alexander II was killed in a terrorist attack by a group called the Peoples' Will.

Leadership isn't about doing whatever public opinion polls tell you.

Another spineless European socialist makies decisions based on mob mentality, what a surprise.

Meanwhile his country continues to disintigrate economically and demographically.

Goodbye Italy, another country that has never liberated anyone, not even itself.

What do you suggest happens?
George Bush dares Italy to continue the war and then does a chicken impersonation when they refuse?
This was of "liberation" is really brining nothing to Italy and costing it money, why continue something that brings you nothing good?
And I'd say the socialists of Italy at least kept a campaign promise and went out of Iraq against pressure by the US and UK.
Spineless, eh?

[JANOSIK007]

I agree with Russki on his last point.

How is keeping to campaign promises spineless? Or you prefer lots of lies and stubborn leadership?

Poland is another country with more than 1000. Don't forget about Poland ! I think they have 1500 personel and lead a much larger coalition of Eastern European troops in SouthWestern Iraq. I am not sure whether this is still the case though.

At this point the success is meassured by the ammount of incidents involving insurgents. Forget about democracy. If you don't have a firm foundation you cannot build. The Italian leader sees the high tensions and activity and Iraq seems volatile and violent not a success as some would have us believe. Italy simply doesn't want to continue to support President Bush in a mission that lacks legitimacy in the international community. I think that if this continues and attacks will not wear themselves out, President Bush (but more likely his successor) will have to seek international intervention. US will not be able to carry the brunt of this on going conflict for years on end. The most optimistic model that I see is that Iraq will transform itself into an Isreal-type state, where terrorism is an ever present factor in the consciousness of the nation. Only now the religious tensions will have transformed themselves into ethnic ones. Terrorism will be brought down into a state of tolerance where it makes the state sensitive, but not vulnerable. Unless there is a major cultural change in Middle East fostered by positive economic transition, such terrorist activities will remain commonplace occurences by Western standards.

Italy has an international obligation to help rebuild Iraq. All western nations do. To turn your back on it now is to forsake the Iraqi people and humanity in general in a battle of murderous terrorists vs peace and prosperity. The choice of the Italian and Spanish left will be remembered.

This is not sees as peace and prosperity in Iraq v bloodthirsty terrorists decision. Gee Man! watch somethin else beside Fox News. Or is that too liberal for ya.

This is more a decision between supporting Bush in an unpoplar and increasingly brutal conflict or backing out and joining the vast majority of the world in protest. There is an alternative to US occupation and that is international peacekeeping. For that, you have to have the support of big 5. Countries that have vehemently opposed the war will not suddenly offer to help US out. Coalition will have to be rebuilt anew with different conditions and set schedules (because no one wants to be bogged down for extensive periods of time). Ofcourse, the situation would have to get much worse before the US would concede this a failure and international community be summoned to act.

[Dirty Harry]

Italy has an international obligation to help rebuild Iraq. All western nations do. To turn your back on it now is to forsake the Iraqi people and humanity in general in a battle of murderous terrorists vs peace and prosperity. The choice of the Italian and Spanish left will be remembered.

[John Wayne]

Italy has an international obligation to help rebuild Iraq. All western nations do. To turn your back on it now is to forsake the Iraqi people and humanity in general in a battle of murderous terrorists vs peace and prosperity. The choice of the Italian and Spanish left will be remembered.

That is [explative deleted]. Italy does not have an obligation to help rebuild Iraq, that rests solely on the USA and UK. And let's not forget that the Italian and Spainish people did NOT want to be part of this conflict, yet their governments entered anyway.

Gee, makes you wonder why they got booted from power.

And what peace/prosperity? I know that there are progresive projects going on in Iraq, but the violence is just eating away at their gains. Violence, I might add, that was caused by the forcefull induction of the Iraqi people into 'democracy'.

Yes, the choice of the Italians and Spainish will be remembered...as the right move for their nation. Nothing more, nothing less.