Truemors
Digg
del.icio.us
AddToAny
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
White House remains silent as Iraq repeats demands for withdrawal timetable
by dunkelberg | July 7, 2008 at 07:17 pm | 1734 views | 159 comments
by Wisco
UPDATE: Fox News 8 July 2008
BAGHDAD — Iraq's national security adviser said Tuesday his country will not accept any security deal with the United States unless it contains specific dates for the withdrawal of U.S.-led forces.
The comments by Mouwaffak al-Rubaie were the strongest yet by an Iraqi official about the deal now under negotiation with U.S. officials. It came a day after Iraq's prime minister first said publicly that he expects the pending troop deal with the United States to have some type of timetable for withdrawal.
U.S. President George W. Bush has said he opposes a timetable. The White House said Monday it did not believe al-Maliki was proposing a rigid timeline for U.S. troop withdrawals.
U.S. officials had no immediate comment Tuesday on al-Rubaie's words.
Original Story -
Iraq's prime minister says he wants a timetable for U.S. withdrawal from his country. The Associated Press Monday reports the timetable would be part of any deal to extend U.S. troops presence in Iraq past the expiration of the UN mandate at the end of the year.
Some type of agreement is needed to keep U.S. troops in Iraq after a U.N. mandate expires at year's end. But many Iraqi lawmakers had criticized the government's attempt to negotiate a formal status of forces agreement, worried that U.S. demands would threaten the country's sovereignty.
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said the memorandum "now on the table" includes a formula for the withdrawal of U.S. troops — an idea opposed by President Bush.
"The goal is to end the presence (of foreign troops)," al-Maliki told several Arab ambassadors to the United Arab Emirates during a meeting in Abu Dhabi.
The Washington Post reports al-Maliki wants an agreement for withdrawal or one with a withdrawal timetable included.
"The current trend is to reach an agreement on a memorandum of understanding either for the departure of the forces or a memorandum of understanding to put a timetable on their withdrawal," Maliki said, according to a statement released Monday by his office that did not specify how long a period a memorandum would cover. "In all cases, the basis for any agreement will be respect for the full sovereignty of Iraq."
OPINION: Al-Maliki is not about to throw out coalition troops heads over heels. I believe he has met the enemy and it is us. He is posturing plain and simple. However, it is obvious the talks are not going well.
Perhaps, he feels he can get the people to rally behind him enough that in the end the U.S. will get no permanent bases, but he will back down on the timetable. That way, both executives come out looking strong - or at least have a better chance of spinning it that way.
He needs to rally his troops to get support for any deal. Once again, "The Great Satan" is a logical choice.
News Tools
July 7, 2008 at 07:17 pm by dunkelberg, 1734 views, 159 comments
Author
Crowd Power
Wisco
Madison, Wisconsin, United States
Add a comment
Comments (159)
at 19:49 on July 7th, 2008
dunkelberg, I like this story. It's good stuff.
at 20:00 on July 7th, 2008
Interesting. Do you think this news will affect the ongoing U.S.-Iraq security pact negotiations?
at 20:20 on July 7th, 2008
This is meant to derail those talks.
He is telling us we can have anything we want, as long as it is what they want.
- reply
zichiat 20:07 on July 7th, 2008
dunkelberg, I like this story. It's good stuff.
I have watched that on BBC News! No mention of permanent bases
at 20:21 on July 7th, 2008
Nope no mention at all. It appears he is taking this stand as a unifying position for the parliament and UAE (and its money). They can throw us out and then have at each other again.
at 20:17 on July 7th, 2008
dunkelberg, I like this story.
Finally Maliki developed some cajonés and some good sense. Now this is a 'benchmark' worth noticing.
I remember George saying that if asked to leave by the democratically elected government of Iraq the USA would. Wanna bet he lied again?
at 20:19 on July 7th, 2008
I am shocked . . . shocked that you would think such a thing.
at 20:29 on July 7th, 2008
Maliki would have no cojones if it wasn' for Bush and the war. Nobody would have heard of Maliki. Many were doing everything in their power to ensure defeat for America in Iraq they know who they are don't they? They reported set backs for the US with glee. Bush lied, Bush lied, Bush lied. The POTUS doesn't have to lie to convince the idiots in congress to agree with him. So when the US hands Iraq their freedom to decide the future of their country those same people say finally. This is funny....
at 20:55 on July 7th, 2008
You finally got it!
Bush is a pathological liar and most of the members of your Congress are idiots who would buy whatever that liar is selling.
Congratulations!
at 21:14 on July 7th, 2008
What leader of a nation is not a liar? Only Fidel or Mao maybe Stalin they would at least tell their people how screwed they were.
at 00:08 on July 8th, 2008
Only Fidel or Mao maybe Stalin
What a love-hate relationship you folks have with these communists. Condemning anyone Cuban or dead, yet cozying up to China, Vietnam and the "new" Russia. It's interesting that the liberals are more suspicious of the communists than the right and the only voice against appeasement.
at 00:45 on July 8th, 2008
The difference is the leaders of other nations are not on a killing spree globally. Your "leader" is.
- reply
zichiat 01:21 on July 8th, 2008
mpress, So you are saying your own American President is a liar? Isn't that treason too?
at 09:44 on July 8th, 2008
Are some of these folks clinically delusional?
at 22:13 on July 7th, 2008
Using the same logic, Vietnam owes its reunification to Lyndon B. Johnson. Somehow, that doesn't ring true.
Is a POTUS something made by Koehler? If it doesn't have to lie to Congress to get it to agree with it, why did it?
- reply
zichiat 22:31 on July 7th, 2008
Why leave Europe out of it, and Japan, and Korea? We are all so grateful to be 'liberated'
at 22:32 on July 7th, 2008
No, we can't leave there. It's not safe yet.
at 00:48 on July 8th, 2008
OH MY GAWD YES! The Nazi's are coming the Nazis are coming! What...they're gone? Then we must defend Europe against Stalin...........yes STALIN....RUN, RUN, the COMMIES are coming and THE SKY IS FALLING!
at 01:21 on July 8th, 2008
Just because you are a communist doesn't mean everyone else is jumping with joy at the thought of waiting in lines for bread.
- reply
zichiat 01:23 on July 8th, 2008
which era are you living in? your greatest communist friend, China does not have bread lines
at 01:27 on July 8th, 2008
Venezuela seems to have lines for bread. China isn't the great new economic power in the world - just look at what happened when an earthquake hit.
And what exactly do you want us to do? On the one hand we are too militaristic and we fight anyone who doesn't exactly follow our part line. On the other hand we are giving our country away to China when we should be tougher with them.
at 01:38 on July 8th, 2008
While the USA's buddies were running Venezuela the only lines were leading to the morgue, for millions. Bread lines are an improvement for sure.
News report! The USA's days of fighting any wars are just about over. Soon, cup in hand begging at the table of the rest of the world, and when you do we'll just tell ya to go to Venezuela!
at 01:42 on July 8th, 2008
My God, where do you get your information from? How can any rational person even say that America, the most prosperous nation on Earth, will soon fall behind Venezuela? Preposterous!
- reply
zichiat 03:22 on July 8th, 2008
China is now the second largest economy in the world. Venezuela is not communist!
at 09:45 on July 8th, 2008
Who is a communist?
The biggest supporters of communist run countries are Republicans.
at 23:20 on July 7th, 2008
Good points Mpress. If we are asked to leave, we will leave, but in a way that doesn't cause lives. The PM wanted us there until he announced to the world that the terrorists have been defeated. Bush lied about WMD ? Now that the last bit of Saadam's Nuclear program have been removed , folks can say that again. I am glad things are so good that Maiki wants us out. It means America has won in the Iraqi theater now we can focus our efforts back on Afghanistan.
at 23:28 on July 7th, 2008
Ok, then. Everybody out of Iraq. Now!
at 00:42 on July 8th, 2008
The PM never ever wanted "you" there. Therein lies the flaw in your logic, and the arrogance of your nation.
Actually you would be wise to focus on your home, which is teetering on a precipice in so many realms.
Grabbing, clutching at straws the American Pollyannas were!
at 01:22 on July 8th, 2008
You do realize that the Iraqi PM wasn't the Iraqi PM before we got into Iraq. So maybe, just maybe, you are wrong with your first sentence.
at 01:39 on July 8th, 2008
You think he wants to be PM under these circumstances?