Maliki: American troops can ‘leave any time they want.’
By on Jul 15th, 2007 at 9:29 am
Maliki: American troops can ‘leave any time they want.’
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said on 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.” One of al-Maliki’s close advisers, Shiite lawmaker Hassan al-Suneid, bristled over the American pressure, telling The Associated Press that “the situation looks as if it is an experiment in an American laboratory (judging) whether we succeed or fail.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
As long as you leave your “permanent bases” and the swimming pools, Burger Kings, Car dealerships and flat screen t.v’s
July 15th, 2007 at 9:35 amWe’ll go but we are taking your oil with us. Why do you think we came here in the first place?
King George the Dumb
July 15th, 2007 at 9:36 amBravo, Clyde….Once again you nailed it…Good to read your post this morning…Blessings
July 15th, 2007 at 9:40 amMaliki is a Shiite, and in the majority. What he is saying is that if American troops leave, the Shiite Militias and Death Squads will take matters into their own hands.
July 15th, 2007 at 9:49 amThe Sunnis would be wise to kick al Qaeda out of Iraq .Sunnis should start compromising instead of promoting suicide bombers. If it comes down to a bloody civil war, they might not like the outcome.
The USA should take Maliki up on his offer, and get our troops out of the middle of this. We bought oil from Saddam, lets just buy it from whatever entity ends up running Iraq.
dead man walking.
July 15th, 2007 at 9:51 am“dead man walking.”
Comment by ace — July 15, 2007 @ 9:51 am
And has been for some time now. I almost feel sorry for him, but he let himself be put in this puppet position by BushCo, so…let the chips fall where they may.
July 15th, 2007 at 9:54 amUN mandate allowing the US/UK coalition to ’secure & protect’ Iraq expires 31 December 2007.
July 15th, 2007 at 9:54 amOff topic:
Marine: Beating of Iraqis
July 15th, 2007 at 9:59 amHi All! (Ace, Jane, Sharon) It’s good to see you all this beautiful morning!
I think Ace nailed it once again (doesn’t he always?? Kudos, Ace – we love ‘ya!).
It’s always been about the oil which most of us without blinders on have always known (and perhaps a bit of impetus of the Shrub wanting to upstage his father with a personal agenda). Building the humongous embassy there was a dead giveaway of our intentions to remain there and pilfer their oil.
It’s always been about the oil. After all, we’ve got two of the biggest Big Oil Rapists sitting in the white house. How could it possibly be otherwise?
They’ve just found handy little catchalls to snow the american people – WMD’s, removal of a dictator, democracy, and now “stability”. It gives the war profiteers plenty more time to rape the citizens of any wealth in this country and who really knows where the 28 Billion which was stolen actually went last week???
What’s ever happened to the other “heist” of missing Iraq money which was announced just prior to Dumbsfeld being heaved from office? Hmmm….
July 15th, 2007 at 10:03 amI’m not sure how to take your comment, Jane. Would you then approve of a Bush initiated coup?
Vietnam redux. This looks like Diem all over again. Including the sectarian violence. Only then it was Catholics vs. Buddhists.
The US ouster of Diem marked the end of South Vietnam’s legitimacy and meant the US had to become more militarily involved rather than less.
Maliki is playing a dangerous game. He’s trying to please both the Iraqi people and the American occupiers. And Bush doesn’t want a Pinnochio puppet.
July 15th, 2007 at 10:06 amGood morning, veritas!
July 15th, 2007 at 10:07 amIt’s just a shame that our Congress has become another sham by not being able to stand up to the shrub and get anything accomplished for the people – utter sham and shame.
If this continues, the people will have no alternative but to really begin scrutinizing each Congressman for EACH vote he casts and then evacuate ALL complicit Republicans in the next election along with Dems who are just as complicit….(that’s some like Lieberman, our Democrat Shill….and others).
Since the Congress is being rendered impotent before our very eyes, the only card left to be played right now rests with We, The People. We need to begin making our voices heard above the corrupt din in Congress and the cacaphony of the daily scandals and spinmeister media.
Maybe it’s time for a total clean sweep in this country?? Maybe it’s time for the emergence of a third party? It’s obviously time to think about doing away with the electoral college system of voting when one who wins the popular vote (of the people individually) and is not sitting in the White House. Just a thought….
July 15th, 2007 at 10:08 amHiya Jane! How are your little furry creatures this morning? They’re so adorable.
I haven’t been posting here when I see that the trolls are doing their thing. It’s not worth the time and aggravation to cull the real discussion pieces from concerned individuals from the trash.
I’ve been on C & L of late and they don’t seem to tolerate the blather of trolls there.
July 15th, 2007 at 10:09 amI know that people have mocked some of the more peace-oriented candidates who have allowed their candor to be expressed but it may be that Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich etc. are the only “trustworthy” candidates in the bunch??? At least that’s what I’m hearing on other blog sites.
July 15th, 2007 at 10:10 amWhen Senator Graham,on ‘Meet The Press’ today, was asked about the statement of Al-Maliki: “Americans can leave any time they want,and Iraq can handle it’…
Senator Graham started to talk about ‘We have interests in Iraq”, when T.Russert asked him :”But Iraq is a sovereign country’…Graham avoided the answer.
Graham didn’t have an answer also on why he voted against Webb’s proposal giving the soldiers in Iraq more days of relief. His answer was only ‘Senate should not mico manage the war’….
July 15th, 2007 at 10:12 amThat’s what happened to Graham after becoming closest ‘Lieberman’s buddy’.
Maliki is playing a dangerous game. He’s trying to please both the Iraqi people and the American occupiers. And Bush doesn’t want a Pinnochio puppet.
Comment by david
I think his last statement about being fine without the US pretty much does him in with the American Occupiers.
July 15th, 2007 at 10:17 amGood Morning all, (Jane, Juan, Veritas, tarazan ) More good post’s..Along with puter problem’s, I to have been staying away because of the troll traffic….Working on anger managment….LOL..Blessings all
July 15th, 2007 at 10:19 amDennis Kucinich etc. are the only “trustworthy†candidates in the bunch??? At least that’s what I’m hearing on other blog sites.
Comment by veritas
The latest little snafu with the open mics exposed them to some degree. But also, look at their health care plans side by side with Dennis’s.
I think alot of people took a step back after Sicko and said, “wait a minute”…. might be a quiet reaction to the film that is almost impossible to measure.
July 15th, 2007 at 10:21 am“I’m not sure how to take your comment, Jane. Would you then approve of a Bush initiated coup?”
Comment by david — July 15, 2007 @ 10:06 am
Lord, no! I wouldn’t approve of a ‘Bush-initiated’ move at all. All I meant was that Maliki accepted this administration’s backing to put him in power, and should have known that, if that backing is removed, his power, and probably his life, will be ‘removed’ by the Iraqi people. What the solution is to establishing Iraq as a true sovereign country with real leaders that the Iraqis will accept, is completely beyond me.
July 15th, 2007 at 10:21 am‘We have interests in Iraqâ€
“our interests in the region”
“staying competitive on the Global Market”
July 15th, 2007 at 10:22 am“I’m not sure how to take your comment, Jane. Would you then approve of a Bush initiated coup?â€
Comment by david
You mean another one?
July 15th, 2007 at 10:23 am“It’s obviously time to think about doing away with the electoral college system of voting when one who wins the popular vote (of the people individually) and is not sitting in the White House. Just a tought….”
Comment by veritas — July 15, 2007 @ 10:08 am
Wayne and I have been talking about this for years. Perhaps it’s time for another Constitutional Convention.
Good morning to you, Sharon! Blessings!
July 15th, 2007 at 10:23 amal-Maliki is preparing for a big September announcement that Iraq will not be asking the UN Security Council to renew the Mandate of the coalition. If he is overthrown by a US sanctioned group, it will make the occupation illegal.
Indeed, the occupation’s legality is threadbare. The UN secretary general called the invasion illegal and the UN security council gave it the Mandate as a figleaf of respectability. But the Mandate imposes conditions on the Americans that they haven’t been meeting.
So, What happens if the Iraqi parliament says “Go!” Will Bush stammer something about “US interests” and give the game away? Will Republicans in Congress suddenly find the backbone to say No to Bush? (BTW, Dems have to stop beating up Pelosi & Reid. It really is the Republicans who have to cave on this issue; the Dems majority is simply too narrow to do anything without bipartisan cooperation.)
July 15th, 2007 at 10:26 am“And Bush doesn’t want a Pinnochio puppet.”
No, he wants one that doesn’t eventually turn into a real boy…he prefers the Charlie McCarthy version.
July 15th, 2007 at 10:28 amComment by david
you’re right; to some degree. Like the Supplimental Spending Bill. Dems didn’t have the votes to override the veto.
But the minority can’t bring it to the floor for a vote. Like Kucinich said, we should have never even submitted one.
Same thing for any funding of this war or this Rogue Executive Branch.
July 15th, 2007 at 10:31 amMarine: Beating of Iraqis became routine
CAMP PENDLETON, Calif. – A Marine corporal testifying in a court-martial said Marines in his unit began routinely beating Iraqis after officers ordered them to “crank up the violence level.”
ADVERTISEMENT
Cpl. Saul H. Lopezromo testified Saturday at the murder trial of Cpl. Trent D. Thomas.
“We were told to crank up the violence level,” said Lopezromo, testifying for the defense.
When a juror asked for further explanation, Lopezromo said: “We beat people, sir.”
Within weeks of allegedly being scolded, seven Marines and a Navy corpsman went out late one night to find and kill a suspected insurgent in the village of Hamandiya near the Abu Ghraib prison. The Marines and corpsman were from 2nd Platoon, Kilo Company, 3rd Battalion, 5th Regiment.
Lopezromo said the suspected insurgent was known to his neighbors as the “prince of jihad,” and had been arrested several times and later released by the Iraqi legal system.
Unable to find him, the Marines and corpsman dragged another man from his house, fatally shot him, and then planted an AK-47 assault rifle near the body to make it appear he had been killed in a shootout, according to court testimony.
Four Marines and the corpsman, initially charged with murder in the April 2006 killing, have pleaded guilty to reduced charges and been given jail sentences ranging from 10 months to eight years. Thomas, 25, from St. Louis, pleaded guilty but withdrew his plea and is the first defendant to go to court-martial.
Lopezromo, who was not part of the squad on its late-night mission, said he saw nothing wrong with what Thomas did.
“I don’t see it as an execution, sir,” he told the judge. “I see it as killing the enemy.”
He said Marines consider all Iraqi men part of the insurgency.
Lopezromo and two other Marines were charged in August with assaulting an Iraqi two weeks before the killing that led to charges against Thomas and the others. Charges against all three were later dropped.
Thomas’ attorneys have said he suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injury from his combat duty in Fallouja in 2004. They have argued that Thomas believed he was following a lawful order to get tougher with suspected insurgents.
Prosecution witnesses testified that Thomas shot the 52-year-old man at point-blank range after he had already been shot by other Marines and was lying on the ground.
Lopezromo said a procedure called “dead-checking” was routine. If Marines entered a house where a man was wounded, instead of checking to see whether he needed medical aid, they shot him to make sure he was dead, he testified.
“If somebody is worth shooting once, they’re worth shooting twice,” he said.
The jury is composed of three officers and six enlisted personnel, all of whom have served in Iraq. The trial was set to resume Monday.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070715/ap_on_re_us/marines_iraq_shooting;_ylt=ArPHvCqwv0M0puO_xYPYbPYDW7oF
July 15th, 2007 at 10:33 amVeritas:
Thanks.
When you don’t notice me posting here, it is not for lack of trying. TP feels compelled to punish truth telling and block free speech. Occasionally they toss me a cookie and allow me to speak, provided it’s not too truthful.
This begs the question, who is the man/cause behind the curtain funding this operation? You already know which subjects result in deletions of posts and silencing of truth-telling. You also recognize that those using a certain software program, designed to hide their use of multiple names, are allowed to spam these threads relentlessly, making them less valuable as educational tools.
Do the math.
July 15th, 2007 at 10:35 amWell I know one thing Ace; TP wiped Mr. P’s use of a fallen soldiers name as a tag yesterday in about 30 seconds (it was there then gone).
I don’t know about the other stuff, but I was pleased to see them remove that.
And by the way, Tired of Fighting (the soldier who posted the name of his fallen friend) came into the thread and posted some time afterward. I’m glad he didn’t have to see his friends name used like that.
July 15th, 2007 at 10:38 am#27 Ace: My precise sentiments as I was meditating this morning. Perhaps this is not the liberal site we believe it to be? It could be a con job for anyone knows. Wouldn’t put it past the reichwing to pose as a liberal blogging site – wouldn’t be the first time.
Keep your posts coming ace. You’ve (along with many other scholars here) have educated us beyond what you even realize. Don’t let the censoring turkeys get you down. Keep trying to bring truth to the fiction parading around today as our government.
To the rest of my TP buddies (forgot dearest Willyloman – sorry – I really enjoy your posts very much, Willy! Keep em rollin’!), I have to sign off for the day – big plans afoot for the afternoon.
But will catch everyone later; that is, if the troll quano is too deep by then….hahaha!
peace & blessings to all!
July 15th, 2007 at 10:43 amJane E Schneider said
I think you’ll have to qualify this statement for me. Although I suspect the election were skewed to prevent a Shiite majority, al-Maliki is head of an Islamic pro-Iranian Shiite party. The Bush administration did meddle in the selection of a Prime Minister, but chose al-Maliki as the “lesser of two evils”. He is not really a puppet so much as he is a doll; he has little power.
Still, anyone familiar with parliamentary democracy will understand that al-Maliki is exerting what power he does have. That is, they refuse to pass legislation legitimizing Bush’s rape of Iraq, they undercut the Americans at every turn, and engage in what amounts to civil disobedience.
I’m not sure what you mean by “his power, and probably his life, will be ‘removed’ by the Iraqi people.” You either accept responsibility for a US-approved coup or you don’t. Putting quotation marks around ‘removed’ does not make anything clear. It’s just coyness.
The Iraqi parliament knows it’s just there for show. And so the delay and debate and criticize the US occupation. They do not deliver the ‘benchmarks’ –see what quotation marks can do– that are so ludicrous from an Iraqi point of view. And they wait out the occupation. (BTW, al-Maliki’s party has strong ties to al-Sadr’s militia.) And they will see to it that the UN mandate is NOT renewed.
The Iraqi people will stand up when the Americans get OUT.
July 15th, 2007 at 10:44 am#28 I’m with you on that call, Willy! They CAN clean up these threads and not allow inane, garbage commentary on them; however, I really don’t believe it’s within their purview to censor truth – after all, Truth is all which truly exists and as they say, learning the Truth will set us free from the government inflicted personal prisons we now find ourselves subjected to.
Later, amigos!
July 15th, 2007 at 10:45 amI take it you’re too young to know Charlie McCarthy.
July 15th, 2007 at 10:46 amWell I know one thing Ace; TP wiped Mr. P’s use of a fallen soldiers name as a tag yesterday in about 30 seconds (it was there then gone).
Comment by willyloman
Willy, that wasn’t Mr P, it was The Joker. I hate to defend that prick, but if Mr P was the one posting as the dead soldier, he wouldn’t be able to post as himself either.
I’m off to Cannon Beach. I’ll check in later.
Y’all let the trolls twist in the wind, and if they get out of line smack ‘em hard. :)
July 15th, 2007 at 10:49 am#23 david
“…the Dems majority is simply too narrow to do anything without bipartisan cooperation.”
I would argue that you have the answer to the Democrats problem. They should do exactly nothing! When the repugs refuse to allow a bill through committee or to vote or King George the Dumb threatens to veto something he doesn’t like the Dems should practice a little passive-aggressiveness: just quit. Don’t compromise, don’t give in, don’t rewrite the bill, don’t resubmit unless without change. After a few of these, particularly appropriations bills funding repug projects and the bushco, enough of the thinking repugs, if there is such an animal, may get the message and change sides. Until then nobody gets hurt except bushco and the troops will be home.
July 15th, 2007 at 10:50 am“If it comes down to a bloody civil war, they might not like the outcome.”
If it comes down to a bloody civil war…..what do you think is happening now? They have been in a bloody civil war for years now.
I say take Maliki up on his offer. Bush really doesn’t have any moral authority to stay now. 71% of the Iraqi people want us to leave because they think we are making matters worse for them and now Maliki says we can go. So, Democrats, it’s time to go.
I agree with a prior poster. Just don’t allow any bill to be introduced that has anything to do with funding the Iraq war. That way you don’t have to worry about a filibuster or a veto. Just announce that when Bush is ready to support our troops by bringing them home, then and only then will congress allocate any more money for the bloody disaster that is the Iraq occupation.
July 15th, 2007 at 10:53 amWell, let me see if I can post it;
Who is behind this? Bush? Cheney? Lynne Cheney? AIPAC? AEI? Council on Foreign Relations? Federal Reserve? World Bank?
No (not smart enough), yes,yes,oh yes,uh-huh,certainly,of course, and you bet-cha.
Don’t forget Marvin Bush running the company that managed security for the trade centers up until 9/11 and Larry Silverstein who, as it just so happened, put in a bid to lease the Trade Centers when Bush came to office…put 14 million down and got 4.1 billion in insurance pay-out….and admited that “the fire department pulled building 7″ on a bbc interview (even though it takes months to plan a demo of a 47 story building (and the fire department rarely travels around with high explosives and engineers trained to drop buildings on a dime))
July 15th, 2007 at 10:56 amComment by Zooey
did you see it happen again yesterday? you think the Joker jumped back in? Mr. P didn’t argue it yesterday.
July 15th, 2007 at 10:57 amlooks like someone didn’t get the memo.
July 15th, 2007 at 10:58 amThis is OT, but TP has not reported on it so I am mentioning it here. I wrote them and told them about it, but apparently they don’t think it is newsworthy. Neither do any of the major news outlets. Do a google news search and see how little coverage this has gotten.
The news: The Bush administration is claiming executive privilege in order to keep from releasing documents that have to do with the friendly-fire death of Pat Tillman. Now why is that not news?
http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2007/07/13/upi_newstrack_topnews/1981/
July 15th, 2007 at 10:59 am#4 the Shiite Militias and Death Squads will take matters into their own hands.
Considering that we set up the death squads (Negraponte and the “Salvador option”), it’s not like this couldn’t have been prevented.
July 15th, 2007 at 11:02 amThanks katie. I saw it on HuffPo.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20070713/tillman-friendly-fire/
crazy isn’t it?
July 15th, 2007 at 11:02 amThey said that they burned his uniform.
Why would you do that? The only reason I could think of is that he wasn’t shot from 50 yards away. At close range, there would be residue of gun powder.
I can’t think of any other reason.
July 15th, 2007 at 11:04 amI think the reason they want to claim Executive Privilege on this is because we will know that they knew before Bush’s remards that it was a FF inncident, and therefore he lied to the American people to use the death of this soldier as a recruiting tool.
July 15th, 2007 at 11:06 am#35 71% of the Iraqi people want us to leave because they think we are making matters worse for them
And the 29% that say “stay” aren’t the vulnerable Sunnis, who the defenders of the occupation imply we should stay and “protect”, but the Kurds, whose little break-away dictatorship needs defending from both Iraqis and Turks – and who also incidentally don’t currently hear the stomping of American boots on their streets.
July 15th, 2007 at 11:07 amIraq has a parliament. It can replace al-Maliki whenever it wants to. It is simply impossible to do so with the Americans holding all the power. al-Maliki serves his purpose in this cat & mouse game. The only thing Bush could replace him with would be another Saddam-like strongman. And that would be the end of this farcical occupation. And, should America announce it’s withdrawal, al-Maliki would likely be replaced by the Iraqi parliament with someone more proactive.
July 15th, 2007 at 11:07 amThis is depressing. I’m going toplay with my dog. Good talking with you.
July 15th, 2007 at 11:09 amI’m not sure what you mean by “his power, and probably his life, will be ‘removed’ by the Iraqi people.†You either accept responsibility for a US-approved coup or you don’t. Putting quotation marks around ‘removed’ does not make anything clear. It’s just coyness.
Comment by david — July 15, 2007 @ 10:44 am
David, please understand first that I do not “accept responsibility” for anything that the US has done in Iraq! All that I’m saying is that, in my opinion, there are probably enough Iraqis who will still see Maliki as a Bush puppet, that, even if/when the US leaves Iraq, some might want him replaced or even assassinated. That’s all. I do not support a coup (”US-approved” or not, and, BTW, since when is anything the rogue Bush administration has done actually been “US-approved?)
And, while I normally enjoy your posts
July 15th, 2007 at 11:14 am“The Iraqi people will stand up when the Americans get OUT.”
Comment by david — July 15, 2007 @ 10:44 am
BTW, I also hope that you’re right on this.
July 15th, 2007 at 11:17 am“And, while I normally enjoy your posts”
Comment by Jane E. Schneider — July 15, 2007 @ 11:14 am
Sorry, didn’t finish the thought…while I normally enjoy your posts and agree with most of them, I don’t go nit-picking through them for possible ambiguities of meaning. I didn’t intend to be coy, I think that you read something between the lines that wasn’t there nor intended to be there.
July 15th, 2007 at 11:21 amdid I leave anyone out there ace? Post is still there. maybe I don’t see the big picture.
July 15th, 2007 at 11:24 amI’m sorry, Jane, I didn’t mean to attack. But I do find Americans tend to see this as “their concern” and not an Iraqi matter.
I was reading just now the outrage from Democrats and Republicans that the Iraqi parliament had gone on recess. They want them to do things. I just laughed. Why? Because the Iraqi parliament doesn’t want to do things for the Americans. And the benchmarks are so patronizing.
You are right, the parliament will probably replace al-Maliki should the Americans withdraw. But that’s the beauty of a parliamentary democracy as opposed to the American system; a prime minister can be sacked and replaced in a day with little fuss. No need for big electoins or impeachments; just a vote of no-confidence and a little backroom wheeling-dealing and a new PM emerges.
And whether it is al-Jaafari, al-Hakim, or Abdul-Mahdi, the situation will be Iraqi politics and not American. BTW, all these politicians are interconnected. And, despite al-Maliki claiming he is not, they all have close ties to Iran. And why shouldn’t they? That’s not really America’s business.
America can’t even make it’s own democracy work, so I think they can hardly claim to fix Iraq’s.
July 15th, 2007 at 11:34 amok, i’m sold, let’s get the rock out of that mess.
July 15th, 2007 at 11:34 am“America can’t even make it’s own democracy work, so I think they can hardly claim to fix Iraq’s.”
Comment by david — July 15, 2007 @ 11:34 am
I agree with you 100% on this! Sometimes I wish that the US had a parliamentary democracy, because the “vote of no-confidence” would come in very handy these days.
July 15th, 2007 at 11:49 ami seem to recall the u.n mandate stating that the u.s led forces were authorized to stay in iraq until dec. 31, 2007 or until maliki said he no longer needs us.
looks like time to go home to me!
July 15th, 2007 at 12:09 pm“Sometimes I wish that the US had a parliamentary democracy, because the “vote of no-confidence†would come in very handy these days.”
We do have a “vote of no-confidence”, it’s called IMPEACHMENT. Unfortunately Nancy Pelosi refuses to put it on the table. As long as she keeps it off the table the Bush Crime Family will continue to thumb their noses at Congress. Write Nancy Pelosi and tell her to get some spine and put impeachment on the table, or step aside and allow someone else to do it. I do this daily. Bookmark this link and go there daily to give her hell!
http://speaker.gov/contact/
July 15th, 2007 at 12:25 pmI think Maliki and his aid Hassan al-Suneid are just calling it the way it is! And in the process they have cut of both legs of the Bush Admins Iraq policy!
All of the factions fighting each other in Iraq share at least one, if not two, common elements. They are Iraqi and they are Muslim. And that is where the solutions for Iraq will germinate. Not with US occupation and interference.
With very bold and telling simplicity, Maliki acknowledged that the internal animosities and strife Iraq is facing are ‘natural’ and with that the US forces can leave whenever they want. Suneid topping it off by disclosing that Iraq is being treated as an experiment in an American laboratory and that the US is committing human rights violations and co-operating with “gangs of killers”. Who knew?
Every news outlet and every respectable blog should hammer the July 14 Maliki/Suneid press conference as the death knell for the Bush Admins Iraq policy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Come Monday I want to see Tony Snow peppered on Maliki’s and Suneid’s statements. I want to hear official White House response to:
“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.”
I also want to hear an official response to the ‘experiment’ and ‘gangs of killers’ statements!!!!!!!!
July 15th, 2007 at 1:22 pmMaybe Iraq can pass a law against illegalaliens in their country… and deport the US military and Halliburton and Blackwater as well.
July 15th, 2007 at 1:22 pmMaliki: The USA should leave immediately so I can in turn surrender my power and the rule of Iraq to Mucktard al-Sadist!!! Let the ethnic cleansing begin!!!
July 15th, 2007 at 4:20 pmIraq is a giant home invasion , and Graham is condoning the killing of Iraqis, and occupation of Iraq, and the media better start being truthful and admit this is an OCCUPATION and start asking the right questions of every politician, ” do you support the occupation of iraq ” and WHAT are these ” interests in iraq “. I’m still waiting for this complicit media with blood on their hands, WHO’S INTERESTS in Iraq, are we there for. WHO goddamn it.
Graham said the big lie AGAIN ” Nobody wants a permanent occupation ” . I can name 200 people who want a permanent occupation, so this treasonous bastards should be held accountable as any neocon for the murder and destruction of Iraq.
What most from BOTH parties are supporting is a BETTER occupation, where the resistance is destroyed, the U.S. can economically and physically control the Iraqi Government, leave 50-80 thousand troops and a lot of mercenariness and then go on to the next country to LOOT.
The debate is about OCCUPATION, not draw down, not redeployment, and whether or not Iraq is a sovereign country , which we all know it’s not.
July 15th, 2007 at 5:17 pmSo, why does Bush not take the — not so subtle — hint, and get us out of there?
The lethal moron has the perfect cover: the Iraqis want us out.
July 15th, 2007 at 11:12 pmMaliki: American troops can ‘leave any time they want.’
World: No shit sherlock.
July 16th, 2007 at 6:52 amA little perspective that may be missing.
From LAT:
CNN:
July 16th, 2007 at 6:55 am
One thing I’ve noticed about all you liberals is your CONSTANT name calling. It’s not every one of you in this thread but it’s a healthy majority. You don’t even see your own arrogance.
July 16th, 2007 at 2:17 pm