PDA

View Full Version : Withdrawing troops


Dr. Aeyze
20-06-2006, 09:17
Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi has announced plans to withdraw his country's troops from Iraq.
Mr Koizumi said Japan's presence had been "highly appreciated by the Iraqi government and its people".

The 600 non-combat troops have been working on reconstruction projects in southern Iraq since February 2004, protected by UK and Australian forces.

The decision was unpopular with the Japanese public, many of whom said it violated Japan's pacifist constitution.

It was Japan's first foray into an active foreign war zone since World War II.

Mr Koizumi said in a televised address that Japan would still provide "as much support as possible for the nation's reconstruction efforts".

The Japanese troops have been based in the city of Samawa, engaged in work such as repairing buildings and providing medical training.

Japanese media reports said the last troops were expected to leave by late July.

International role

The decision to withdraw is likely to have been prompted by plans for the UK and Australia to hand over responsibility for security in the area around Samawa to Iraqi forces.


The Iraqi forces will take over Muthanna province next month, in what will be the first such handover since the US-led invasion.

Japan has been gradually been expanding its role on the international stage in recent years.

It deployed nearly 1,000 troops to Indonesia to help with humanitarian aid following the December 2004 tsunami

But the deployment to Iraq - which began in late 2003 - drew criticism from many Japanese, who said it would be impossible for the troops not to get drawn into the fighting.

Mr Koizumi won warm praise for the deployment from US President George W Bush, but he was criticised at home for overriding the constraints of the constitution to serve his own political purposes.

No Japanese soldiers have been killed or wounded in Iraq, but Mr Koizumi faced a political crisis in 2004 when three aid workers were taken hostage by Iraqi insurgents, who demanded that Japanese troops withdraw.

The three were eventually released unharmed, but another five Japanese citizens have been killed by militants.

Mr Koizumi is due to visit President Bush at the end of this month. He is due to leave office later this year.


Just wondering what peoples opnions would be on pulling their own countries troops out of Iraq. I think I'm pro-removing british troops but it casuses more problems then it solves with regards to enforcement and terrorist group pressure. Bleh =/

Brindley
20-06-2006, 10:09
Good for Japan. I didn't even realise they were in Iraq, to be honest!

I'm all for our troops coming home. I think Iraq's stable enough to be able to fend for itself nowadays, and any further outside involvement is just going to foster even more resentment towards us. Or perhaps not, without actually going there and seeing what it's like it's hard to judge. But I'd be welcoming of any and all of our troops coming home.

Tharrick
20-06-2006, 11:57
Good for Japan. I didn't even realise they were in Iraq, to be honest!

They weren't involved in the actual invasion, since they're not technically allowed to have an army out of their own borders

Auron-X
20-06-2006, 15:49
Well Australia isn't sending troops back or anything like they were going to (not sure if they were going to send the entire army back or just some), but rather are moving their camp like 80k south to some other place and taking control there, but apparently it's more dangerous and the UK troops that were there are pulling back.

Glash
28-10-2006, 15:28
Japan pull it troops out of Iraq so why dont the The UK it would save the lives of the troops

Zal
17-11-2006, 23:15
I dont know i think the us troops should stay untill it is stable enough for there own people to interact with eachother in a civil manner it is on the verge of civil war.

Glash
05-12-2006, 21:01
yeah but if you think about it they on the verge of civil war because the UK and the US have not pull out they troops.

Dale Anthony
06-12-2006, 13:40
I think it's daft. Many of you might disagree but I've had family members in wars so I know it's difficult but if you're gonna do a job, you must do it properly and we really haven't achieved ANYTHING sending troops into Iraq so why bother pulling them all out straight after?

Glash
06-12-2006, 14:12
but if think about this is a america thing we just back the americas up way do we have to stay there then.

Dr. Aeyze
06-12-2006, 14:37
This topic is like... half a year old D:
I agree with Dale, I think pulling out before it's settled would cause more disruption then staying. The Iraqi police force doesn't really have much of a hold on the region so it'd be pretty pointless withdrawing only for it to fall back into the hands of the rebels, then anything that had been achieved would be pretty much for naught.


but if think about this is a america thing we just back the americas up way do we have to stay there then.

This is really the case, the US and British forces are focused on different points of the country. As it stands it'd be impossible for the US forces to contain the entirity of Iraq. For now the US forces are focused around Bagdád, in the centre/north(ish) part of the country and the British forces are focused around Basra in the south by the Kuwait border, so it's not really a case of anyone "backing up" anyone else at all, the forces are isolated from one another as far as I'm aware.

If British soliders were to pull out suddenly I think it would tip Basra inside out, (and likewise with Bagdád if the US troops were to leave) I think a key part of stabalizing the country is to empower the local forces, i.e. the Iraqi police, so that some semblance of balance and stability can be restored (as it stands, as far as I'm aware, the foreign troops are still the major power balance in the country to counter the rebels)

I dunno if that makes any sense xD lots of ideas tumbling around in my head, not sure how to write them down in ways that make sense O__o

BOC mk2
16-01-2007, 15:01
we should withdarw all our troops from iraq and let them kill them selves not our troops

Mirae
16-01-2007, 15:21
BOC this is in the Mature section, please refrain from posting really short one liners in this section. Especially if it's rather offensive like in that post you made...verbal warning, next time I'm gonna have to give you an infraction. Also this thread is really old...

Read this! (http://forums.hellandheavennet.com/showthread.php?t=2004)

Renotheturk
06-02-2007, 14:40
the war on terror was a bad idea full stop i hate to say it but terrorism outnumbers even the combined force of all of the diplomatic countrys navys airforces and land troops the best thing for us to do is order a withdrawel and get our boys back home

thatperson
08-02-2007, 03:12
i'm all for removing troops from iraq almost all UN troops are not trained for fighting gurilla warfare, but as we know John Howard wont do a thing with out G.W.Bush's approval

Tharrick
15-02-2007, 08:35
the war on terror was a bad idea full stop i hate to say it but terrorism outnumbers even the combined force of all of the diplomatic countrys navys airforces and land troops the best thing for us to do is order a withdrawel and get our boys back home

Utter bollocks. If they outnumbered us like that, they wouldn't bother with guerrilla warfare, they wouldn't bother with suicide bombs and martyrs and snipers and other terrorist acts. They'd just invade.

keiskay
16-02-2007, 16:05
Utter bollocks. If they outnumbered us like that, they wouldn't bother with guerrilla warfare, they wouldn't bother with suicide bombs and martyrs and snipers and other terrorist acts. They'd just invade.
hell they wouldn't bother being hidden if they had that many people they'd take over one nation at a time. plus i doubt they can out number the 1.4 million American troops or the 2.8 million Chinese troops in fact i think that total number of military troops around is about 100mil or 500mil dont really know.