OMITTED

What the news leaves out.

← Omitted front page

US Completes Withdrawal of Last Troops from Iraq

8 sources · updated 2026-10-01
Left 75% Center 0% Right 25%
3 left · 0 center · 1 right

What happened

The United States formally completed the withdrawal of its remaining troops from Iraq, with the last American forces and equipment leaving Erbil Air Base in the country's Kurdish north, ending the Iraq portion of Operation Inherent Resolve, the U.S.-led coalition mission begun in 2014 against the Islamic State. The departure fulfilled a 2024 U.S.-Iraq agreement to wind down coalition operations; after the 2003 invasion, a 2011 withdrawal, and a 2014 return to fight ISIS, most remaining U.S. forces had already left federal Iraq beginning in October 2025, and about 2,500 American troops had been in the country before the latest drawdown. Combined Joint Task Force–Operation Inherent Resolve remains operational and is now headquartered in Jordan; U.S. officials said American forces will continue counter-ISIS operations in Syria and will still provide training and intelligence support to Iraq. More than 4,400 U.S. service members died in Iraq over the course of the conflict. President Donald Trump announced the completion at the White House, and Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi said a new phase of Iraqi sovereignty had begun; a June pledge by Baghdad to disarm militias operating outside state control by the withdrawal date was not met.
Sourcing check · Fully on the record · 4 articles

3 of 3 articles cite a named source for the story. It was on the record from the first report.

What these terms mean and how they're counted
On the record · names a source 3 of 3
On the record means the article cites a source by name for the story's main claim: a person, or an institution speaking officially, such as a company statement or a named agency's spokesperson. The opposite is an unnamed source. The count is how many of the counted articles cite at least one such source; the names are everyone named across them, each once however the articles spell it. Here: U.S. Central Command, Sean Parnell, President Donald Trump, Iraqi Prime Minister Ali Al-Zaidi, Pentagon and Ali al-Zaidi
Primary evidence · cites a document or data 1 of 3
Primary evidence means the article cites a record you could check yourself: a court filing or ruling, a dataset or report, a recording or transcript, an official statement or press release, market data. A quote is not a document. The count is how many articles cite one. Here: official statement
Credits another outlet 0 of 3
The article says the story comes from another outlet's reporting (“first reported by Reuters”). Those articles relay the story; they are not independent confirmation. Here: Each article presents its own reporting.
Unnamed sources 0 of 3
The main claim is attributed to people who are not identified: “people familiar with the matter”, “officials said”. The count is how many articles do this.
How it developed
When the first report landed and whether it named anyone; when the first named source and the first document appeared. Here: First report Sep 30, 18:46 UTC by ABC News, naming its source. First document 19 hours later, from Breitbart (official statement).
Not counted 1
Opinion, analysis and video pieces, and articles too short to assess. Every count above is out of the counted articles. An article republished under a new headline is one article.
This is about who is cited, not whether the story is true. Each source below says what it names. How we count
Omitted — what each side leaves out

Unpacked

Left-leaning coverage treats the pullout as the end of America's war in Iraq; right-leaning coverage reports that the anti-ISIS command did not close — it moved. Right-leaning coverage is more complete on that point: Daily Wire reports the coalition task force remains operational from a new headquarters in Jordan and that U.S. forces will continue the fight in Syria, details Mother Jones does not carry. Left-leaning coverage leads with the 2003 invasion's costs and with Iran as the beneficiary. Right-leaning coverage leads with an orderly exit and a presidential victory announcement. Vox casts the pullout as an "inglorious ending" that helps Tehran, while Daily Wire foregrounds Trump's White House remarks instead of that ledger. How many American troops now sit in Jordan and Syria under the same task force that just left Iraq?
Bottom line

You cannot tell from Mother Jones whether Operation Inherent Resolve still exists; Daily Wire is the outlet that says it does, with its headquarters now in Jordan.

The receipts — 3 facts one side's coverage lacks
  • Combined Joint Task Force-Operation Inherent Resolve remains operational and is now headquartered in Jordan official statementin Daily Wire · absent from left-leaning coverage
  • The 2003 invasion led to hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths numberin Guardian, Mother Jones · absent from right-leaning coverage
  • The war cost, conservatively, more than a trillion dollars numberin Mother Jones · absent from right-leaning coverage
The Left View
Left-leaning outlets treated the departure as the close of a 23-year war launched on false claims that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction, a campaign they said produced hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths and, conservatively, more than a trillion dollars in costs. They stressed that Iran and its allied militias celebrated the exit — one Iranian-backed commander called it "a crushing defeat for the American project" — and that Iraqi security figures warn vacuums could let ISIS remnants recover. Vox argued the United States is leaving "very loose ends" that "ultimately benefit…Iran," pointing to the unmet militia-disarmament deadline and ordinary Iraqis' fear their country "could be swallowed up" by Iran-linked groups. Mother Jones underscored how often the war had been declared over before, citing Donald Rumsfeld's 2002 assurance that fighting "certainly isn't going to last any longer" than five months. Vox called the result "an inglorious ending" and "a sobering lesson on the limits of American power."
The Right View
Right-leaning coverage and President Trump's remarks framed the pullout as a completed mission and an overdue exit from what he called a decades-long "quagmire" born of "very bad decision-making." Trump said it was "a great day for America," "a victory for the United States," "a victory for Iraq, and a decisive victory over ISIS, which has been completely decimated," adding, "We came to fight a caliphate, and there is no longer a caliphate." CENTCOM commander Adm. Brad Cooper said ISIS "no longer poses a systemic threat to Iraq's national security" and that Iraqi forces, including the Peshmerga, now have "the capacity, leadership, and operational independence to unilaterally manage threats to their homeland." The Daily Wire highlighted the administration's turn toward economic partnership, especially oil deals, and Trump's order to remove every piece of equipment. Cooper said U.S. and coalition forces stationed elsewhere in the region "will remain ready to respond to any ISIS threats that arise."
Our Take (balanced)
The left's strongest argument is that military success against ISIS did not produce a durable political settlement, as evidenced by Iran-aligned militias celebrating the exit as an American defeat, Baghdad missing its militia-disarmament deadline, and Iraqi security advisers warning that a vacuum could let militants recover. The right's strongest argument is that the 2014 counter-ISIS mission met its stated aim: CENTCOM's assessment that ISIS is no longer a systemic threat and that Iraqi forces can operate independently, together with the destruction of the territorial caliphate and a remaining U.S. posture in Jordan and Syria. The central unresolved tension is whether the withdrawal is the successful end of a limited war against ISIS or another inconclusive close to a far larger project that never left Iraq able to contain Iranian influence and remaining militant threats without American troops on the ground.

8 sources

More stories

The week's bottom lines, in your inbox

One email a week: the five stories that mattered and what they actually mean. Free.