Iraq says may agree timetable for U.S. withdrawal

[JoeChalupa]

Iraq says they may agree to timetable US withdrawal

raq says may agree timetable for U.S. withdrawal
Mon Jul 7, 2008 10:54am EDT

By Dean Yates and Ahmed Rasheed

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki raised the prospect on Monday of setting a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops as part of negotiations over a new security agreement with Washington.

It was the first time the U.S.-backed Shi'ite-led government has floated the idea of a timetable for the removal of American forces from Iraq. The Bush administration has always opposed such a move, saying it would give militant groups an advantage.

The security deal under negotiation will replace a U.N. mandate for the presence of U.S. troops that expires on December 31.

"Today, we are looking at the necessity of terminating the foreign presence on Iraqi lands and restoring full sovereignty," Maliki told Arab ambassadors in blunt remarks during an official visit to Abu Dhabi, capital of the United Arab Emirates.

"One of the two basic topics is either to have a memorandum of understanding for the departure of forces or a memorandum of understanding to set a timetable for the presence of the forces, so that we know (their presence) will end in a specific time."

Maliki was responding to questions from the ambassadors about the security negotiations with the United States. The exchange was shown on Iraqiya state television.


This could be a great move forward to bringing our troops home.

[boutons_]

"terminating the foreign presence on Iraqi lands and restoring full sovereignty,"

won't EVER happen, and dubya's puppet/protege Maliki is making such noise as lies for domestic consumpstion only.

The US military will remain in Iraq for decades until US oilcos are finished stealing Iraqi oil under predatory production sharing agreements, rather than dealing with Iraq National Oilco and nationlized oil fields, as is the case in other Gulf countries. "It's Their Oil"

Watch the Iraqi October elections for disenfranchising, with US military support, the Sadr City/Sadrist block, to keep puppet Maliki in power.

[101A]

Iraq says they may agree to timetable US withdrawal

raq says may agree timetable for U.S. withdrawal
Mon Jul 7, 2008 10:54am EDT

By Dean Yates and Ahmed Rasheed

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki raised the prospect on Monday of setting a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops as part of negotiations over a new security agreement with Washington.

It was the first time the U.S.-backed Shi'ite-led government has floated the idea of a timetable for the removal of American forces from Iraq. The Bush administration has always opposed such a move, saying it would give militant groups an advantage.

The security deal under negotiation will replace a U.N. mandate for the presence of U.S. troops that expires on December 31.

"Today, we are looking at the necessity of terminating the foreign presence on Iraqi lands and restoring full sovereignty," Maliki told Arab ambassadors in blunt remarks during an official visit to Abu Dhabi, capital of the United Arab Emirates.

"One of the two basic topics is either to have a memorandum of understanding for the departure of forces or a memorandum of understanding to set a timetable for the presence of the forces, so that we know (their presence) will end in a specific time."

Maliki was responding to questions from the ambassadors about the security negotiations with the United States. The exchange was shown on Iraqiya state television.


This could be a great move forward to bringing our troops home.

Iraq setting a timetable is a very different prospect than an artificial one conceived in Washington. This is good news. Iraq govt. BEHAVING like one = victory.

[101A]

"terminating the foreign presence on Iraqi lands and restoring full sovereignty,"

won't EVER happen, and dubya's puppet/protege Maliki is making such noise as lies for domestic consumpstion only.

The US military will remain in Iraq for decades until US oilcos are finished stealing Iraqi oil under predatory production sharing agreements, rather than dealing with Iraq National Oilco and nationlized oil fields, as is the case in other Gulf countries. "It's Their Oil"

Watch the Iraqi October elections for disenfranchising, with US military support, the Sadr City/Sadrist block, to keep puppet Maliki in power.

A U.S. base in Iraq is not, technically, "Iraq Land". Troops can remain stationed there - , without Maliki lying in this statement. U.S. presence pretty much being a necessity with Iran next door

[boutons_]

So US occupying Iraq land makes it "US land"?

So the US invasion was just an old-fashioned 19th century, imperialistic land grab?

So US occupation of "US LAND" surrounded by Iraq is not occupation?

As always with the Alice-in-Wonderland right wing, black is white, up is down, bad is good.

Deterrance by USA of Iran is possible from the Gulf Fleet, and from US-occupied SA and Kuweit. Iran can be struck for anywhere.

[JoeChalupa]

I feel that some troops will remain in Iraq for many years to come.

[peewee's lovechild]

I feel that some troops will remain in Iraq for many years to come.

They need to come home, all of them.

We should just abandon Iraq and let them all blow each other up straight to .

[RandomGuy]

They need to come home, all of them.

We should just abandon Iraq and let them all blow each other up straight to .

If you think gas prices are high now, let an Iraq slide into a full civil war that will become a proxy fight for its neighbors:

Iran
Syria
Turkey (oh, did we mentiont Turkey is part of NATO?)
Saudi Arabia

Oops. Remove Iranian and the Saudi production of oil from the global market, and see what happens to the global price of oil.

We're stuck. :^/

[ChumpDumper]

Mission accomplished!

Again!

[101A]

So US occupying Iraq land makes it "US land"?

So the US invastion was just an old-fashioned 19th century, imperialistic land grab?

So US occupation of "US LAND" surrounded by Iraq is not occupation?

As always with the Alice-in-Wonderland right wing, black is white, up is down, bad is good.

Deterrance by USA of Iran is possible from the Gulf Fleet, and from US-occupied SA and Kuweit. Iran can be struck for anywhere.

U.S. bases are U.S. soil. That's all; just pointing out possible semantic, political speach.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Things are looking up, I'm going to about stupid that makes no sense.

[lefty]

So basically the U.S governement has decided when to leave

[peewee's lovechild]

If you think gas prices are high now, let an Iraq slide into a full civil war that will become a proxy fight for its neighbors:

Iran
Syria
Turkey (oh, did we mentiont Turkey is part of NATO?)
Saudi Arabia

Oops. Remove Iranian and the Saudi production of oil from the global market, and see what happens to the global price of oil.

We're stuck. :^/

Dude, we're ed anyway.

Who gives a about the Middle East?
Really, if it wasn't for their precious oil, do you think anyone besides those living there would give a about that area?

Oil prices will skyrocket . . . so what? We're reaching that point anyway. I'd rather do away with a slow death and deal with it head on.

We'll find an alternative when our feet are put to the fire. Necessity is the mother of invention, and we have brilliant minds in this country that can make it happen.

[Clandestino]

We're still in germany, japan, korea, bosnia, etc... if it makes sense for the u.s. to be there, we'll stay there. why weaken ourselves bc of es like boutons

[JoeChalupa]

They need to come home, all of them.

We should just abandon Iraq and let them all blow each other up straight to .

I don't see that happening where they are ALL home. A U.S. military presence will need to remain for quite awhile.

[Anti.Hero]

"terminating the foreign presence on Iraqi lands and restoring full sovereignty,"

won't EVER happen, and dubya's puppet/protege Maliki is making such noise as lies for domestic consumpstion only.

The US military will remain in Iraq for decades until US oilcos are finished stealing Iraqi oil under predatory production sharing agreements, rather than dealing with Iraq National Oilco and nationlized oil fields, as is the case in other Gulf countries. "It's Their Oil"

Watch the Iraqi October elections for disenfranchising, with US military support, the Sadr City/Sadrist block, to keep puppet Maliki in power.

http://www.amazon.com/Shock-Doctrine...5456183&sr=8-1

[peewee's lovechild]

We're still in germany, japan, korea, bosnia, etc... if it makes sense for the u.s. to be there, we'll stay there. why weaken ourselves bc of es like boutons

We're weakening ourselves by stretching ourselves out.

Why do we still need to be in Germany, Japan, or Bosnia?

South Korea I can understand to a certain point, but why the do we "need" to be anywhere else?

[peewee's lovechild]

I don't see that happening where they are ALL home. A U.S. military presence will need to remain for quite awhile.

There's no reason to stay there.

Just get the out and let them kill themselves.

[Anti.Hero]

Whether we leave tomorrow or leave in 20 years..it is the middle east.

They will go back to the same tired no matter what. We all know this.

What's the point in staying to just piss away more resources and more lives. To set up a bogus democracy in a fragile pathetic country while having to pump trillions and hold their hand knowing it will just fall apart once we leave? that.

[JoeChalupa]

There's no reason to stay there.

Just get the out and let them kill themselves.

That is exactly what we CANNOT do.

[peewee's lovechild]

That is exactly what we CANNOT do.

Why not?

Didn't your boy Obama run on the platform of an "immediate withdrawal"?
Didn't he blast McCain for saying that the U.S. would have a presence there for years to come?

We can let them all go to and we should.

It makes no sense to stay there.

[JoeChalupa]

Why not?

Didn't your boy Obama run on the platform of an "immediate withdrawal"?
Didn't he blast McCain for saying that the U.S. would have a presence there for years to come?

We can let them all go to and we should.

It makes no sense to stay there.

He also said that some troops would need to stay to protect us citizens. What makes no sense is to leave the job undone. Bush knew it too.

[peewee's lovechild]

He also said that some troops would need to stay to protect us citizens.

The only citizens that need to be protected are the ones working at the embassy. Embassies have troops to protect them. To say that troops will be needed to protect U.S. citizens at the emabssy is redundant.

As for any other U.S. citizen in Iraq, they know the risks of being there. It's not the government's job to protect them. If that were the case, the government would have to have a prominent presence in Africa, Latin America, and many Asian hotspots.

Don't protect his recent backtracking. He ran on a platform of an "immediate withdrawal" and now he's reconsidering it.

So much for new politics.

[ElNono]

This Maliki must be on drugs or he just wants to start the sectarian massacre ASAP.
As soon as we pull out 5 brigades from there, the place goes to again. And it's not just the terrorists. Shiites and Sunnis are going to bout again sooner or later, the Mahdi will come out again as soon as we step out, and the kurds out north are already signing their own oil contracts basically sidestepping Maliki's government.
If we want to keep the peace, we're gonna be there for a while. I wouldn't be surprised if we need another 'surge' down the road. These guys are wackos, they don't like each other, and they can wait an eternity to do what they want to do.

[JoeChalupa]

The only citizens that need to be protected are the ones working at the embassy. Embassies have troops to protect them. To say that troops will be needed to protect U.S. citizens at the emabssy is redundant.

As for any other U.S. citizen in Iraq, they know the risks of being there. It's not the government's job to protect them. If that were the case, the government would have to have a prominent presence in Africa, Latin America, and many Asian hotspots.

Don't protect his recent backtracking. He ran on a platform of an "immediate withdrawal" and now he's reconsidering it.

So much for new politics.

I'm not protecting any backtracking. You are just pissed off that Hillary got beat. That is plain for all to see. Vote for McCain if that is how you feel. No sweat off my back.