via FP Passport:

There’s an article in the Weekly Standard by Frederick Kagan about withdrawing our troops to Iraqi Kurdistan or Kuwait. It’s worth a read as it gets into the nitty gritty details that I didn’t when I proposed withdrawing to an independent Kurdistan. Interestingly, Kagan doesn’t address that possibility, seemingly forgetting that if the US setup camp in Kurdistan, it would definitely become a de facto independent country and would become so disconnected from Iraq that de jure wouldn’t be far off. What would keep them from declaring what everyone already knows? Especially with the US guarantee in place?

THE DEMOCRATIC TAKEOVER of Congress has predictably led to a rise in calls for the immediate withdrawal of American troops from Iraq. The authors of these calls, like Carl Levin and Joe Biden, frequently maintain that their proposals are not for “withdrawal” but for “redeployment.” U.S. forces would remain poised on bases in Iraqi Kurdistan, Kuwait, or elsewhere in the region to support the Iraqis with “rapid reaction forces.” The United States would thereby both “incentivize” the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own security and give them an over-the-horizon safety net. The trouble is that this “safety net” is illusory. It serves only to mask out-and-out withdrawal and defeat.

We’ll ignore some of the sillier suggestions, such as basing “over the horizon” forces in Guam (thousands of miles away from Iraq) or Pakistan (hundreds of miles away and a place where we can’t even get permission to send Special Forces teams to hunt Osama bin Laden). Let’s consider instead the more realistic sounding plans of basing “quick reaction forces” (QRFs, as the military calls them) in Iraqi Kurdistan or Kuwait.

[...] When any of the practical difficulties are considered, it is revealed as utter nonsense.

Read all of it.

• BROWSE / IN TIMELINE
• « Transformation in Germany
• » Marine Corps Rules for Gun Fighting