Obama tells Congress U.S. deploying up to 275 troops to Iraq

WASHINGTON Mon Jun 16, 2014 6:42pm EDT

A member of the Iraqi security forces searches the trunk of a vehicle at a checkpoint, as security increases in Baghdad, June 16, 2014.  REUTERS/Thaier Al-Sudani

A member of the Iraqi security forces searches the trunk of a vehicle at a checkpoint, as security increases in Baghdad, June 16, 2014.

Credit: Reuters/Thaier Al-Sudani

Related Topics

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama told Congress on Monday the United States was deploying up to 275 military personnel to provide support and security for U.S. personnel and the country's embassy in Baghdad after militants seized control of the north of the country.

"This force is deploying for the purpose of protecting U.S. citizens and property, if necessary, and is equipped for combat," Obama said in a letter to lawmakers. "This force will remain in Iraq until the security situation becomes such that it is no longer needed."

The president said he was notifying Congress under the War Powers Resolution.

(Reporting by Mark Felsenthal; Editing by Peter Cooney)

FILED UNDER:
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (27)
Lyn4U wrote:
Did Obama ASK Congress before he sends troops as war making powers given to Congress in the Constitution?

Jun 16, 2014 6:47pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Saluki21 wrote:
There is no easy answer to what is going on in Iraq and Syria. The issues there have NOTHING to do with Bush or Obama, so you Foxnews and MSNBC junkies just look stupid pointing blame. The issues there have to with colonial powers leaving those lands in the mid 1900′s and arbitrary rulers and borders being set up.

Lets imagine for a minute there was no oil there. What would the place look like? Tribes scattered across the lands in a state of semi-war / semi-truce.

Back to Iraq – the US spent close to a trillion training the Iraqi military. They folded at first chance. WHY? Not from a lack of training or equipment. From a lack of belief in their government. The central government is exclusive, not inclusive. Sunnis and Kurds don’t feel part of the democratic process. Both groups would just assume have their own states.

I say let it play out. Lets get a multi-national force to protect the oil fields and let those that live there figure things out. Sounds harsh – but before judging the absurdity of what I proposed make sure you understand how commodities are priced on the global market. The US may get the majority of its oil from Canada, Mexico, and Venzeuela, but the price paid around the world will be impacted by events in Iraq. Hence this is a global issue. Either the world solves it together, protects the natural resources, or suffers the consequences of higher energy prices.

Jun 16, 2014 9:37pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Robert76 wrote:
Must be wonderful to be you Lyn4U, 4825, or betrayed. Throwing out all those outragious accusations. The troop withdrawal from Iraq as signed by GW Bush. As for treason, check the definition. So far President Obama has not committed anything close to treason. Iraq wanted us out. We are out. As for the 275, they need to concentrate on removing all our people from Iraq. We had no business in Iraq in the first place. They had nothing to do with 911. They did not have WMD’s and none of the lying that went on during GWB’s tenure justifies our being there or overthrowing a sovereign nation’s government.

Jun 16, 2014 9:56pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.

Pictures