I don't think they want a rapid withdraw either, but they seem ready to start discussing a phased withdraw, which would probably begin decreasing our presence very soon.
I'm just saying if they hear anything but, "OK" from Bush, then the president is going back on one of the fundemental aspects of the invasion - something he can't do without looking like a hypocrite.
I can
agree with you here.
I think a singularity just opened up somewhere...
But based on information you DO have, you have an opinion, no?
I honestly can't say.
When America leaves Iraq, Iran and Saudi Arabia will no doubt LEAP at the chance to influence the country's "development". Military support will no doubt be a contingent of this influence... but if this happens, the Sunni population will suffer. I don't see a way around this unless we keep US troops in Iraq indefinately, which is no longer an option that Iraq is willing to accept... or Saudi Arabi for that matter.
Keeping our troops there after Desert Storm did
nothing but endanger our relations with the Middle East, and with energy dependence soley placed on an uninterupted flow of oil from the Saudis, I doubt we want to go around pissing them off as well - not to mention the possibility of incuring
another September 11th-like disaster.
Removing our troops now really
is our only option, not only because Iraq
wants it, but so will the Saudis.
This means the operational capability of Iraq's forces is irelavent... and so is any opinion *I* have on it.
An update:Iraq official: Need dates for U.S. withdrawal
National security adviser says any security deal must contain timetable
BAGHDAD - Iraq will not accept any security agreement with the United States unless it includes dates for the withdrawal of foreign forces, the government's national security adviser said on Tuesday.
The comments by Mowaffaq al-Rubaie underscore the U.S.-backed government's hardening stance toward a deal with Washington that will provide a legal basis for U.S. troops to operate when a U.N. mandate expires at the end of the year.
On Monday, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki appeared to catch Washington off-guard by suggesting for the first time that a timetable be set for the departure of U.S. forces under the deal being negotiated, which he called a memorandum of understanding.
Rubaie said Iraq was waiting "impatiently for the day when the last foreign soldier leaves Iraq."
"We can't have a memorandum of understanding with foreign forces unless it has dates and clear horizons determining the departure of foreign forces. We're unambiguously talking about their departure," Rubaie said in the holy Shiite city of Najaf.
... clear as crystal.
He was speaking to reporters after meeting Iraq's top Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani.
Rubaie said he spoke to Sistani about the U.S. talks, but did not say if the cleric had an opinion on the negotiations. The revered cleric is routinely briefed on key national issues.
"I informed the (clerical leaders) about some of the advances in the talks. There are real problems and difficulties, and we have many roadblocks ahead. There is a big difference in outlook between us and the Americans," Rubaie said.
I imagine the concerns for the "audience" are all about over, right?
This isn't
posturing and this isn't
ego.
This a nation's request for sovereignty.
The Bush administration has always opposed setting any withdrawal timetable, saying it would allow militant groups to lie low and wait until the 150,000 U.S. troops in Iraq left.
On Tuesday, the White House said the talks were not aimed at setting a hard deadline for withdrawal.
"Negotiations and discussions are ongoing every day," White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said in Japan, where President Bush is attending a Group of Eight summit.
"It is important to understand that these are not talks on a hard date for a withdrawal."
...
this I don't like.
It shouldn't be a debate or a discussion. It should be, "I'd like for you to leave my country," to which the US responds, "this is how fast we can do it" and then we start getting the hell out of dodge.
That should be it.
Dispute over immunity for U.S. troops
In a further complication, Iraq's deputy parliament speaker Khalid al-Attiya said lawmakers must approve any deal the Iraqi government reaches and will probably reject the document if American troops are immune from Iraqi law.
It would be virtually unthinkable for the United States to allow its soldiers to be subject to Iraqi law.
Al-Maliki's preference for a memorandum of understanding, which could be an attempt to bypass parliament, is in contrast to earlier talks which have all been leading to the signing of a formal Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA).
"Without doubt, if the two sides reach an agreement, this is between two countries, and according to the Iraqi constitution a national agreement must be agreed by parliament by a majority of two thirds," Attiya told Reuters in an interview.
Washington has SOFA pacts with many countries, and they typically exempt U.S. troops from facing trial or prison abroad.
Iraq said last week Washington was showing flexibility on some key issues, which officials said included dropping a demand for immunity for private contractors working for the U.S. government.
Control of military operations and airspace are other points of contention, along with the detention of prisoners.
Well, if the timetable is to Parliment's liking, they may not even have to worry about exempting US soldiers from Iraqi law.
But the most surprising thing here is that the US would agree to have contractors classified as "non-exempt". I imagine they will be staying longer then any US troops... so I'm a little surprised they would be "thrown to the wolves" like that.
It could create a reason for companies to pack-up and leave... which would be bad...
Fall in violence emboldens government
Iraq's government has felt increasingly confident in recent weeks about its authority and the country's improved stability, and Iraqi officials have sharpened their public stance in the negotiations considerably in just the last few days.
Violence in Iraq has fallen to its lowest level in four years. The change has been driven by the 2007 buildup of American forces, the Sunni tribal revolt against al-Qaida in Iraq and crackdowns against Shiite militias and Sunni extremists.
I've said a thousand times, I hope I'm wrong about Iraq.
If Bush can make it work, I will have a newfound respect for him.
However, if he fails to acknowledge Iraq's claim to sovereignty, he'll quickly find a fresh source of criticism from just about EVERYBODY.
