Goodbye Iraq: Last US combat brigade heads home

[Obamessiah]

Lol! as if, over here in the UK the american bases mainly stick to themselves, they have thier own facilities and tend to use them over the local ones. Therefore there is not much of an economic impact.

Yeah, young men with disposable income rarely ever leave base. Sounds perfectly plausible.

[bucsense]

27,000 still in South Korea.
57,000 still in Germany.
Almost 10,000 in England.
Almost 10,000 in Italy.
32,000 in Japan.

The world's military!!

and every time we try to close a base or draw down they whine and complain because a) they love the implicit guarantee of protection that an american base gives a country b) it injects a lot of money into their economies.

Lol! as if, over here in the UK the american bases mainly stick to themselves, they have thier own facilities and tend to use them over the local ones. Therefore there is not much of an economic impact. What these bases are for is early warning/first strike for the US. Sure we get something out of it but the main reason why you have bases here is for quick deployment for your own safety. This has become even more so since the break up of the eastern block.

You'll also find that there are a number of joint stations that are run by the UK and US military since we are allies. These bases are on British soil but not actually in Britain, Ascenion Island and Diego Garcia being the main 2.

Fool.......Without American help you'd be waving a Nazi flag over your tidbit of a landscape.......But go ahead, kick us in the butt and show no gratitude. Maybe you might visit the graveyard at Normandy and see how many Americans died to save your arse.

[Col. Klink]

Hey look what I found. The facebook page of the 4th Brigade Combat Team, the exact same unit that was part of the 3rd Infantry Division. You know, that division that aided and assisted it's way to Baghdad at the start of the war. Or how about the fact that 3 of the 4 3rd ID brigades are in Iraq right now and classified as Aid and Assist. So the very same troops that invaded and destroyed the Iraqi Army, is now a non combat unit. OK gotcha.

http://www.facebook.com/pages/4th-Brigade-3rd-Infantry-Division/143298474922

These men and women are combat troops plain and simple. To call them anything else is a slap in the face. I don't care what you call the mission, but the troops are combat troops.

Not sure why you bothered with that. Did you even bother to read Fitz's link up there? It pretty much explained what's going on .... If it will unwad your panties, can we call them combat troops no longer on combat missions?

[SepeBucs]

Not sure why you bothered with that. Did you even bother to read Fitz's link up there? It pretty much explained what's going on .... If it will unwad your panties, can we call them combat troops no longer on combat missions?

Because you were the Mary Jane who countered Fitz and the others, specifically using italics to emphasize that there were no longer and Combat brigades in Iraq.

why is this so hard for some to grasp? There are no more Combat Brigades left, per the US Army.

And yes you can call them combat troops (since that is what they are) not on combat missions but it's a shame the President and media is not. Just check 99% of the headlines and 99% of the political speeches, they all say only support troops are left.

As for the actual missions, the US soldiers are no longer in the lead, but US troops still accompany IA and back them up as needed. From armor, to helos to actual troops on the ground.

[Col. Klink]

Not sure why you bothered with that. Did you even bother to read Fitz's link up there? It pretty much explained what's going on .... If it will unwad your panties, can we call them combat troops no longer on combat missions?

Because you were the Mary Jane who countered Fitz and the others, specifically using italics to emphasize that there were no longer and Combat brigades in Iraq

LOL .... I didn't counter Fitz ... Hell, his article was very informative and the basis for what I was saying ... From the article:

As the final convoy of the Army’s 4th Stryker Brigade Combat Team, based at Fort Lewis, Wash., entered Kuwait early Thursday, a different Stryker brigade remained in Iraq.

Soldiers from the 2nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team of the 25th Infantry Division are deployed in Iraq as members of an Advise and Assist Brigade, the Army’s designation for brigades selected to conduct security force assistance.[/b]

And yes you can call them combat troops (since that is what they are) not on combat missions but it's a shame the President and media is not. Just check 99% of the headlines and 99% of the political speeches, they all say only support troops are left.

As for the actual missions, the US soldiers are no longer in the lead, but US troops still accompany IA and back them up as needed. From armor, to helos to actual troops on the ground.

That description sure as hell sounds like support troop duties so, again, we're talking about semantics .... Instead of saying "only support troops left", they should be saying "only troops in support" are left ... Jesus. Bottom line is that we've transferred all, or the bulk, of the combat responsibilities to the Iraqis.

[SepeBucs]

You see klink, it just goes to show how  mis-informed you really are. There was no special transformation of any responsibilities or anything. The only thing that happened was the 4th BCT left Iraq and the White House made a big deal about announcing all combat troops have left Iraq. US troops have not been the lead force in operations in Iraq for a long time now. There was nothing magical about this troops movement. US troops are still in combat in Iraq.


What you fail to understand, that despite any real change in anything, Obama and company are trying to maximize political gain from it. It is the only thing positive the Democrats can claim to have achieved. It is a pure 100% political ploy.

BTW support troops and troops in support, two very different things. Maybe one day your daddy can explain it to you.

I just love it when people who are so clueless about the military try and correct people who have actually lived it.

[Col. Klink]

You see klink, it just goes to show how mis-informed you really are. There was no special transformation of any responsibilities or anything. The only thing that happened was the 4th BCT left Iraq and the White House made a big deal about announcing all combat troops have left Iraq. US troops have not been the lead force in operations in Iraq for a long time now. There was nothing magical about this troops movement. US troops are still in combat in Iraq.


What you fail to understand, that despite any real change in anything, Obama and company are trying to maximize political gain from it. It is the only thing positive the Democrats can claim to have achieved. It is a pure 100% political ploy.

BTW support troops and troops in support, two very different things. Maybe one day your daddy can explain it to you.

I just love it when people who are so clueless about the military try and correct people who have actually lived it.

LOL ... Okay, General. I'm gleaning information off of an Army Times site but YOU know better ... and BTW, support troops and troops in support can be two very different things but they can also mean the same thing .... Bottom line, AGAIN, is that whether you want to call them combat troops or wombat troops, they are no longer leading the combat operations over there ... haven't been for a while, according to you ... and the exit of the last currently designated combat brigade is symbolic of that. Does that mean no more American military deaths over there? Would be nice but that won't happen until they're ALL gone .... And is the current administration going to milk it for all they've got? Of course, that's what ALL politicians do ... and Lord knows Obama wnats to be able to say he's keeping at least one of his campaign promises.

[SepeBucs]

hey ship wreck, you do know that the Army times is not published by the Army right? The Army Times, Navy Times, Marine Corp, Air Force Times or Military Times are 100% civilian publications with no special access or privileges to the military.  It is owned by the same company that owns USA Today newspaper, The Arizona Republic , The Indianapolis Star, The Cincinnati Enquirer, The Tennessean in Nashville, The Courier-Journal in Louisville, The Des Moines Register, The Honolulu Advertiser, the Detroit Free Press and The News-Press in Fort Myers and they also own 23 television stations. But I guess someone with no real life military experience of their own would know that.


And yes, I tend to trust my personal experiences and the current correspondence from troops in Iraq today over some pimple faced kid reporters. The Email I got just a few hours ago from my buddy in Iraq telling me he just got back from a combat patrol is 1000 times more credible than you. I sent him the link about no more combat troops in Iraq. He and his troopers got a good laugh out of that.

Keep thinking what you want to think. Keep calling it what you want to call it. The plain fact is, US troops are still in combat in Iraq and will continue to be so until that damn government finally solidifies itself. Just like the "advisers" in Vietnam, these men and women are combat troops and in combat.

[SepeBucs]

and Lord knows Obama wnats to be able to say he's keeping at least one of his campaign promises.

Whoops, his campaign promise was all troops out by 31 March 2009.

[SepeBucs]

Hrmm, well it appears that assisting the Iraqis is combat, two good men killed today.