Iraqi PM insists peace is possible without U.S.

[George Gervin's Afro]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19760628/


Al-Maliki claims ‘full confidence’ if coalition forces withdraw ‘at any time’

BAGHDAD - Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said Saturday that the Iraqi army and police are capable of keeping security in the country when American troops leave “any time they want,” though he acknowledged the forces need further weapons and training.

The embattled prime minister sought to show confidence at a time when congressional pressure is growing for a withdrawal and the Bush administration reported little progress had been made on the most vital of a series of political benchmarks it wants al-Maliki to carry out.

Al-Maliki said difficulty in enacting the measures was “natural” given Iraq’s turmoil.

But one of his top aides, Hassan al-Suneid, rankled at the assessment, saying the U.S. was treating Iraq like “an experiment in an American laboratory.” He sharply criticised the U.S. military, saying it was committing human rights violations, embarassing the Iraqi government with its tactics and cooperating with “gangs of killers” in its campaign against al-Qaida in Iraq.

Al-Suneid’s comments were a rare show of frustration toward the Americans from within al-Maliki’s inner circle as the prime minister struggles to overcome deep divisions between Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish members of his coalition and enact the American-drawn list of benchmarks.

In new violence in Baghdad on Saturday, a car bomb leveled a two-story apartment building, and a suicide bomber plowed his explosives-packed vehicle into a line of cars at a gas station. The two attacks killed at least eight people, police officials said on condition of anonymity because they were not authorize to release details of the attacks.

Thursday’s White House assessment of progress on the benchmarks fueled calls among congressional critics of the Iraqi policy for a change in strategy, including a withdrawal of American forces.

‘Still in need of more weapons’
Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari warned earlier this week of civil war and the government’s collapse if the Americans leave.

But al-Maliki told reporters Saturday, “We say in full confidence that we are able, God willing, to take the responsibility completely in running the security file if the international forces withdraw at any time they want.”

But he added that Iraqi forces are “still in need of more weapons and rehabilitation” to be ready in the case of a withdrawal.

On Friday, the Pentagon conceded that the Iraqi army has become more reliant on the U.S. military. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Peter Pace, said the number of Iraqi batallions able to operate on their own without U.S. support has dropped in recent months from 10 to six, though he said the fall was in part due to attrition from stepped-up offensives.

Al-Maliki told a Baghdad press conference that his government needs “time and effort” to enact the political reforms that Washington seeks — “particularly since the political process is facing security, economic and services pressures, as well as regional and international interference.”

“These difficulties can be read as a big success, not negative points, when they are viewed under the shadow of the big challenges,” he said.

In the White House strategy, beefed-up American forces have been waging intensified security crackdowns in Baghdad and areas to the north and south for nearly a month. The goal is to bring quiet to the capital while al-Maliki gives Sunni Arabs a greater role in the goverment and political process, lessening support for the insurgency.

But the benchmarks have been blocked by divisions among Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish leaders. In August, the parliament is taking a one month vacation — a shorter break than the usual two months, but still enough to anger some in Congress who say lawmakers should push through the measures.

‘The situation looks as if it is an experiment’
Al-Suneid, a Shiite lawmaker close to al-Maliki, bristled at the pressure. He called Thursday’s report “objective,” but added, “this bothers us a lot that the situation looks as if it is an experiment in an American laboratory (judging) whether we succeed or fail.”

He also told The Associated Press that al-Maliki has problems with the top U.S. commander Gen. David Petraeus, who works along a “purely American vision.”

He criticized U.S. overtures to Sunni groups in Anbar and Diyala, encouraging former insurgents to join the fight against al-Qaida in Iraq. “These are gangs of killers,” he said.

“There are disagreements that the strategy that Petraeus is following might succeed in confronting al-Qaida in the early period but it will leave Iraq an armed nation, an armed society and militias,” said al-Suneid.

He said that the U.S. authorities have embarrassed al-Maliki’ government through acts such as constructing a wall around Baghdad’s Sunni neighborhood of Azamiyah and repeated raids on suspected Shiite militiamen in the capital’s eastern slum of Sadr City. He said the U.S. use of airstrikes to hit suspected insurgent positions also kills civilians.

“This embarrasses the government in front of its people,” he said, calling the civilian deaths a “human rights violation.”




I think they are getting the idea that we chose to fight them 'al qaeda' there in their own backyards. They are finally figuring out that we decided to fight our war on terror with their country as a theatre of our war.... On one hand Yoni tells us here that fight them there so they don't follow us home and the Iraqi people are saying thanks for putting us in the middle...

[boutons_]

The Iraqi govt doesn't want us there,

a majority of the Iraqi people don't want us there, saying US presence worsens/prolongs the violence (remember, dubya is supposed to have invaded to do the Iraqis a big ing favor),

and a majority of the AMERICAN people don't want the US in Iraq,

so what's the problem?

dubya and head plan to build the huge US embassy and those 4 huge US military bases and stay there for decades, to protect their oil grab.

Invading Iraq was NEVER about terrorism,
nor bad guy Saddam,
nor bringing democracy to Iraq.
It was always and is always an oil grab.

And now the Iraqis don't want to pass the oil law that gives foreign US/UK oilcos ownership of the fields and production-sharing contracts, which loses the Iraqis a lot of oil money, which is why the US/UK oilcos want production-sharing. All other countries long ago switched to lease contracts.

[PixelPusher]

Damn, the corpse of "We fight them over there, so we don't have to fight them here" isn't even cold yet, and we're already getting "We will stand down when they stand up" ready to walk the green mile.

[Yonivore]

BAGHDAD - Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said Saturday that the Iraqi army and police are capable of keeping security in the country when American troops leave “any time they want,” though he acknowledged the forces need further weapons and training.

Noticeably absent from that article is any request, by the Iraqi government, that U. S. forces actually leave.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Noticeably absent from that article is any request, by the Iraqi government, that U. S. forces actually leave.

But al-Maliki told reporters Saturday, “We say in full confidence that we are able, God willing, to take the responsibility completely in running the security file if the international forces withdraw at any time they want.”


So let's leave.

[Yonivore]

But al-Maliki told reporters Saturday, “We say in full confidence that we are able, God willing, to take the responsibility completely in running the security file if the international forces withdraw at any time they want.”


So let's leave.

Well, there's the little matter of killing the rest of al Qaeda while we have them on the run.

I'll just assume you haven't been paying attention.

But, seriously, the president has multiple objectives in Iraq, one of which is enabling Iraqi police and military to secure and hold their geography while maintaining peace. Another is tracking down and killing terrorists.

It's nice that Maliki says we can leave, if we want.

[Yonivore]

[George Gervin's Afro]

Well, there's the little matter of killing the rest of al Qaeda while we have them on the run.

I'll just assume you haven't been paying attention.

But, seriously, the president has multiple objectives in Iraq, one of which is enabling Iraqi police and military to secure and hold their geography while maintaining peace. Another is tracking down and killing terrorists.

It's nice that Maliki says we can leave, if we want.

Killing the rest of al-qaeda? I think we are in agreement that killing the rest of these f*ckers is probably the only way to ensure our safety. However we wll never be able to kill them all. Al-Qaeda is in Iraq because of us.Since they seem to have a nver ending supply of dead enders we may never leave Iraq if that is the requirement to be met. We won't know if Iraq can stand on it's own until we let them do it themsleves. I get the feeling these people may step up to the plate knowing the Americans won't be there to fight their battles anymore. There are reports that Iraqis are actually fighting al-qaeda now so to me that seems to bode well. Iaqis don't want al-qaeda in their backyard and they seem to want to kill them as bad as we want to. The problem now is that our presence is bringing al-qaeda in and we have decided to fight our war with them being in the middle of it. To me that is not the way to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqis.

[PixelPusher]

It certainly looks like a more unified Iraq when you paint it all in one "happy green" color...all the Shia, Sunni and Kurds are just one big happy family.

[Yonivore]

Killing the rest of al-qaeda? I think we are in agreement that killing the rest of these f*ckers is probably the only way to ensure our safety. However we wll never be able to kill them all.

So we should give up?

Al-Qaeda is in Iraq because of us. Since they seem to have a nver ending supply of dead enders we may never leave Iraq if that is the requirement to be met.

I think we disagree on who was there first, however, at this point, it no longger matters...there they are. And, I'd rather they keep sending their dead enders where we already have a quarter-million troops than to send them where Posse Comitatus prohibits large-scale military operations.

We won't know if Iraq can stand on it's own until we let them do it themsleves. I get the feeling these people may step up to the plate knowing the Americans won't be there to fight their battles anymore. There are reports that Iraqis are actually fighting al-qaeda now so to me that seems to bode well. Iaqis don't want al-qaeda in their backyard and they seem to want to kill them as bad as we want to. The problem now is that our presence is bringing al-qaeda in and we have decided to fight our war with them being in the middle of it. To me that is not the way to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqis.

Well, hearts and minds we are winning. I suggest you spend time reading Michael Yon's dispatches from neighborhoods where the actual fighting is taking place instead of relying on stringer-supplied AP stories.

But, irregardless, I don't think anyone wants us to stay in Iraq one minute longer than we have to. The Congress confirmed Petreaus, delayed funding for a couple of months and then gave it to him and told him to report back in September. Now, there's a drumbeat to yank the rug in late June, early July.

What gives? I think the left sees the progress being made and is afraid of success.

[George Gervin's Afro]

So we should give up?


I think we disagree on who was there first, however, at this point, it no longger matters...there they are. And, I'd rather they keep sending their dead enders where we already have a quarter-million troops than to send them where Posse Comitatus prohibits large-scale military operations.


Well, hearts and minds we are winning. I suggest you spend time reading Michael Yon's dispatches from neighborhoods where the actual fighting is taking place instead of relying on stringer-supplied AP stories.

But, irregardless, I don't think anyone wants us to stay in Iraq one minute longer than we have to. The Congress confirmed Petreaus, delayed funding for a couple of months and then gave it to him and told him to report back in September. Now, there's a drumbeat to yank the rug in late June, early July.

What gives? I think the left sees the progress being made and is afraid of success.

With all due respect I have heard fr the last 4 yrs that 'progress is being made. Please allow me to withold my judgement that progress is actually being made. The only progress that will acceptable to the American people is when we turn this over. Bush has been his own worst enemy since the war started. He and his fellow hawks have been telling us for the last 4 yrs that things are getter better. If anyone questioned them they were taunted, disrespected, and mauled politically. So now you are still taunting and disrepecting the same people with the " What gives? I think the left sees the progress being made and is afraid of success" comments. If anything your side's position should be taken with a grain of salt.

[Yonivore]

With all due respect I have heard fr the last 4 yrs that 'progress is being made. Please allow me to withold my judgement that progress is actually being made. The only progress that will acceptable to the American people is when we turn this over. Bush has been his own worst enemy since the war started. He and his fellow hawks have been telling us for the last 4 yrs that things are getter better. If anyone questioned them they were taunted, disrespected, and mauled politically. So now you are still taunting and disrepecting the same people with the " What gives? I think the left sees the progress being made and is afraid of success" comments. If anything your side's position should be taken with a grain of salt.

Reserve your judgement, Petraeus reports in September.

[PixelPusher]

With all due respect I have heard fr the last 4 yrs that 'progress is being made. Please allow me to withold my judgement that progress is actually being made. The only progress that will acceptable to the American people is when we turn this over. Bush has been his own worst enemy since the war started. He and his fellow hawks have been telling us for the last 4 yrs that things are getter better. If anyone questioned them they were taunted, disrespected, and mauled politically. So now you are still taunting and disrepecting the same people with the " What gives? I think the left sees the progress being made and is afraid of success" comments. If anything your side's position should be taken with a grain of salt.

It's all about how you define progress, in this particular case, they've decided to place all the other calamitous cluster elements of Iraq on "ignore" and focus exclusively on al Qaeda in Iraq as the singular enemy and the source of all the problems, hence the "cooperation" with many of the sunni militia groups we used to call "insurgents"...notice how everything is now "al Qaeda" and the term "insurgent" is nowhere to be found.

This is all based on the gamble that the Sunnis and Shia will tacitly agree to play nice and allow us a graceful exit after "defeating" al Qaeda.

[clambake]

So we should give up? What gives? I think the left sees the progress being made and is afraid of success.

I swear, making statements like this shows you're unravelling. Nobody wants to lose, but victory can't even be defined anymore. You need to focus on how to spin the outcome. You're more concerned with his reputation than you are about his consistent failures or mounting death tolls.

Cute map. Is that paint by numbers?

[George Gervin's Afro]

Reserve your judgement, Petraeus reports in September.

I , like , most Americans want us to succeed in Iraq. Why? At this point there 'is' no other option. Where you and I part ways with this is at what to do now. I am willing to give Petraeus a chance to get this done. It seems that there is 'real' progress being made on the ground in Iraq. I hope there is.

[boutons_]

"focus exclusively on al Qaeda in Iraq as the singular enemy and the source of all the problems"

This is the lie from dubya. Other sources, including US generals in Iraq, less self-serving and demagogic than dubya, place AQ not as the top priority in Iraq, but as the 4th or 5th.

Even with AQ foreigners totally obliterated in Iraq (won't happen anyway, they will just keep coming), the Sunni/Shiite civil war will continue until exhaustion (who knows what Turkey and Iraqi Kurds will do?), the total lack of progress in the Sunni/Shiite political discussions will remain stalemated.

Petraeus and dubya have both said that the ONLY SOLUTION in Iraq is political, not miltary. The surge was supposed to stabilize (just) Bagdad so the Iraqi politicians could make progress. dubya's own report his week shows the Iraqi politicians stalemated, NOT prgressing, no matter how un/successful the surge.

Petraeus will make a MILITARY report in Sep, which will in all probability say "need more time" (open ended, actually, at least thru 20 Jan 2009) for MILITARY operations (because the surge hasn't kicked ass as advertized).

Does anybody really believe the Iraqi politicians and the Sunni/Shiite civil war will be substantially improved, ie, allowing US draw down, in next 60 days, after 4 years of violence?

[fyatuk]

It's all about how you define progress, in this particular case, they've decided to place all the other calamitous cluster elements of Iraq on "ignore" and focus exclusively on al Qaeda in Iraq as the singular enemy and the source of all the problems, hence the "cooperation" with many of the sunni militia groups we used to call "insurgents"...notice how everything is now "al Qaeda" and the term "insurgent" is nowhere to be found.

This is all based on the gamble that the Sunnis and Shia will tacitly agree to play nice and allow us a graceful exit after "defeating" al Qaeda.

Well, in all fairness the change to cooperation with the Sunni "insurgents" wasn't all the occupation/coalition forces idea. The Sunni insurgents had originally co-operated with al-Qaeda and other true terrorist groups that had moved into Iraq, but even they got sick of those groups.

Of course, it's easy to classify the Sunni/Shia difficulties as internal struggles and bow out under the premise of ceasing to exascerbate the situation. Can't really do that with al-Qaeda and other groups that moved in after we dismantled the Iraqi security system (still not sure how they thought 150k combined troops could replace the 400k Iraqi troops in providing security).

[Yonivore]

I , like , most Americans want us to succeed in Iraq. Why? At this point there 'is' no other option. Where you and I part ways with this is at what to do now. I am willing to give Petraeus a chance to get this done. It seems that there is 'real' progress being made on the ground in Iraq. I hope there is.

I don't see anything you said with which I disagree.

[Yonivore]

Aide: Iraqi PM's Comments Misconstrued

On Sunday, al-Maliki's adviser Yassin Majid told The Associated Press that the prime minister meant that efforts to bolster Iraq's security forces would continue "side-by-side with the withdrawal."

Majid urged the United States to continue building up Iraqi forces so they would be ready whenever the White House orders a troop withdrawal.

[xrayzebra]

The Iraqi govt doesn't want us there,


dubya and head plan to build the huge US embassy and those 4 huge US military bases and stay there for decades, to protect their oil grab.

Invading Iraq was NEVER about terrorism,
nor bad guy Saddam,
nor bringing democracy to Iraq.
It was always and is always an oil grab.

Damn boutons, where is all this oil dubya and cheney
"grabbed". And how come we are paying these high
prices for gasoline? Looks like dubya would get those
prices lower with all "his" new oil and bring those
poll numbers up. You know like he hid all those WMD
to prove Saddam had them........

[PixelPusher]

Aide: Iraqi PM's Comments Misconstrued

So Malaki has his own "Tony Snow" to re-imagineer his prior comments. Why is this news?

[Oh, Gee!!]

Well, there's the little matter of killing the rest of al Qaeda while we have them on the run.

the problem is that "Al Qaeda in Iraq" is in a position to fight effectively on the run. We can chase them out of Baghdad but they'll emerge elsewhere in Iraq to cause chaos and destruction.

[Yonivore]

the problem is that "Al Qaeda in Iraq" is in a position to fight effectively on the run. We can chase them out of Baghdad but they'll emerge elsewhere in Iraq to cause chaos and destruction.

We'll see. They're not doing so hot right now.

[Oh, Gee!!]

We'll see. They're not doing so hot right now.

but we're also not in a traditional war. we can kill them at a ratio of 10-to-1 but they get their victories from bombing the crap out of innocent civilians and not necessarily by killing more of us than we kill of them. Essentially, their main function is to make the U.S. look foolish, and they gain ground in that regard with every car bombing.

[clambake]

Maliki should be kicked out and tried for treason. Those statements can only amount to the destruction of our troops morale. It's the equivalent of giving the enemy comfort and aid. He should be in line in front of Murtha.