THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, TENTH THREAD.

being a bit of a news-junkie , i just watched some TV news .

a captain and a major(?) who had recently returned from iraq were asked for their opinion on the coming "surge" of u.s. troops .
they both agreed that more troops would be needed in iraq .
the captain , who had served near baghdad , felt that the increase was insuffient . he said that in his opinion about 150,000 to 200,000 u.s. troops would be needed in baghdad alone to try and restore order . he also claimed that a recently issued u.s. army counter-insurgengy manual (i may have the name wrong) stated a requirement for 150.000 to 200,000 u.s. troops for baghdad alone .
both were quite outspoken in saying that protecting the iraqi civilians must be the # 1 priority . they said that the u.s. must train , pay and equip enough iraqi police to do an adequate job to help protect the civilians .
they spoke of a "one-on-one" matching of u.s. military and police forces with their iraqi counterparts ; they even spoke of integrated units and police-stations .
the captain finished by saying that if the u.s. takes the right action now , in another 5 to 10 years iraq might indeed be a symbol for democracy in the middle-east .

i certainly enjoyed the frank talk by these two u.s. soldiers .
they didn't use any platitudes or jibberish to describe a serious situation .
hope they will be listened to ...

("Both were slow learners at best. "
the headmasters must have been 'otherwise' occupied not to notice that the students were slow learners - particularly since they were shown off as "best student in school" . doesn't say much about the headmaster either imo) .
hbg

0 Replies

Quote:

Maliki Said to Have Pledged Mahdi Crackdown

Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that its sources in the Iraqi government are saying that there are some secret paragraphs to the agreement between the Bush administration and the al-Maliki government in Iraq to act against militia leaders. The article suggests that the model of the US raid on an Iranian liason office in Irbil might be deployed against Mahdi Army leaders and against Sunni Arab guerrilla commanders. That is, such raids would be small, targeted, quick and involve kidnapping suspected wrongdoers.

The article also quotes US ambassador in Baghdad, Zalmay Khalilzad, as saying that al-Maliki promised Bush that he would confront the [Shiite] Mahdi Army.

It says that Jabir al-Khafaji, a lieutenant of Muqtada al-Sadr who preached at his mosque in Kufa on Friday, condemned the "new politicians" and charging that "their strategy and goal is to get rid of the pious believers who have opposed the occupation." Hmm. I'd say he thinks there is about to be a fight with the Mahdi Army.

The LA Times reports that Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has appoint Abud Qanbar of Amara to be the top military commander in Baghdad. Qanbar is a Shiite, though nothing is known of his political affiliations. He would be in a position to tip off Shiite politicians and militia leaders about US plans. The US had pushed for another officer, but al-Maliki vetoed their choice and appointed his own man.

Adnan Dulaimi, a leader of the Sunni fundamentalist Iraqi Accord Front in parliament, criticized Qanbar's appointment as a unilateral act of the prime minister that came with no consultation with parliament.

Turkish PM Tayyip Erdogan says he will, too, invade Iraq if he wants to. And who, he says, is the US to tell others they can't invade Iraq at will?

Links at the source

0 Replies

If Maliki doesn't perform as promised, he must be replaced with someone capable of performing as Maliki promised. This can be done by the Iraq Parliament appointing a replacement, or by the Iraq Parliament holding a new election and the Iraqi people electing a replacement, or by the US military appointing a replacement.

One way or another the Iraq government's effectiveness problem must be solved.

0 Replies

Iraqi Constitution:
HERE
B.

1- The President of the Republic may submit a request to the Council of Representatives to withdraw confidence from the Prime Minister.

2- The Council of Representatives may withdraw confidence from the Prime Minister based on the request of one-fifth (1/5) of its members. This request may be submitted only after a question has been put to the Prime Minister and after at least seven days from submitting the request.

3- The Council of Representatives shall decide to withdraw confidence from the Prime Minister by an absolute majority of its members.

C. The Government is considered resigned in case of withdrawal of confidence from the Prime Minister.

D. In case of a vote of withdrawal of confidence in the Cabinet as a whole, the Prime Minister and the Ministers continue in their positions to run everyday business for a period not to exceed thirty days until a new cabinet is formed in accordance with the provisions of article 73 of this constitution.

E. The Council of Representatives may interrogate independent commission heads in accordance with the same procedures as for the ministers and may dismiss them by an absolute majority.

0 Replies

paul koring reports that the u.s. government is not likely to issue an ultimatum to malaki .

the press report i read today says :
"Mr. Levin pressed Defence Secretary Robert Gates to explain what would happen if once again the Iraqi government failed to deliver tens of thousands of police and troops to Baghdad.

Mr. Gates refused to issue an ultimatum that U.S. troops would be ordered home if the Iraqi government failed to make good on its promises.

"Saying, 'If you don't do this, we'll leave, and we'll leave now,' does not strike me as being in the national interests of the United States," he said.

Mr. Levin wasn't impressed.

"The President said that, quote, 'If the Iraqi government does not follow through on its promises, it will lose the support of the American people' -- his words. Well, that's an empty threat, given the fact that the Iraqi government has already lost the support of the American people and it hasn't affected their behaviour," he said."

full report :
DEMOCRATS ASSAIL IRAQ PLAN

0 Replies

hbg, The surge of 21,500 troops will accomplish nothing except to expose more of our soldiers to the already too high death and injury. The problem with Bush's "plan" for a temporary surge is simply that it is inadequate and too late. The US doesn't have the 150,000 to 200,000 troops needed, and the troops we do send will be ill equpped and ineffective. The insurgents know that this "surge" is temporary, and all they have to do is wait it out.

Bush should send his own kids to Iraq; they need more volunteers.

0 Replies

Under Bushie's new plan our troops will get to sleep in Police stations in the neighborhoods they patrol. That is a formula for slaughter. Iraqi Police stations are some of the most dangerous places on earth.

0 Replies

Another thought: I remember Bush and his gang repeating the refrain that telling the enemy any time frame would not accomplish anything, because they'll just wait it out until we reduce our troop level.

DUH!

Question

0 Replies

Apparently, we are all agreed for our own reasons that the new Iraq strategy as currently described is going to fail. What do you think will be the consequences of that failure? What should the US do instead to avoid failure in Iraq?

Absent a rational alternative, we cannot adequately evaluate what Bush is doing or adequately evaluate a better way for him to do it.

On the otherhand, if failure is your objective like it's George Soros's objective then enjoy.

ican711nm wrote:

GYORGY SCHWARTZ alias GEORGE SOROS alias GEORGE WILL SOAR wrote:

[in his 2000 book page 337 Open Society]
Usually it takes a crisis to prompt a meaningful change in direction.

[Washington Post page A03 of November 11, 2003]
Ousting Bush from the White House is the central focus of my life. It's a matter of life and death.

[2003 edition of his book page 15 The Alchemy of Finance]
My greatest fear is that the Bush Doctrine will succeed--that Bush will crush the terrorists, tame the rogue states of the axis of evil, and usher in a golden age of American supremacy. American supremacy is flawed and bound to fail in the long run.

What I am afraid of is that the pursuit of American supremacy may be successful for a while because the United States in fact employs a dominant position in the world today.

[in his 2004 book page 159The Bubble of American Supremacy ]
the principles of the Declaration of Independence are not self-evident truths but arrangements necessitated by our inherently imperfect understanding.

[in April 2005 the Soros funded Campus Progress web site headline]
An Invitation to Help Design the Constitution in 2020 (invitation to A Yale law School Conference on "The Constitution of 2020: a progressive vision of what the Constitution ought to be.")

Gyorgy is working to transform America into an atheist collective.

If Gyorgy's news media succeed in persuading more than 50% of Americans to oppose Bush's plan, it will boost our enemy's effort and that will defeat America in Iraq regardless of whether Bush's strategy is OK.

0 Replies

ican wrote;

Quote:

If Gyorgy's news media succeed in persuading more than 50% of Americans to oppose Bush's plan, it will boost our enemy's effort and that will defeat America in Iraq regardless of whether Bush's strategy is OK.

I say, welcome to america where the people get to vote, and yes, more than 50% oppose Bush's plan. The sad thing ican but according to Foxfyre, the majority does rule.

0 Replies

dyslexia wrote:

ican wrote;

Quote:
If Gyorgy's news media succeed in persuading more than 50% of Americans to oppose Bush's plan, it will boost our enemy's effort and that will defeat America in Iraq regardless of whether Bush's strategy is OK.

I say, welcome to america where the people get to vote, and yes, more than 50% oppose Bush's plan. The sad thing ican but according to Foxfyre, the majority does rule.

I think I'll re-read Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. Do you have any good ideas about where the competent should go after they go on strike?

0 Replies

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1990463,00.html

Iran next, soon?

0 Replies

McTag wrote:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1990463,00.html

Iran next, soon?

What do you want to be done?

0 Replies

We keep seeing this over and over and over where the USA or the Brits or whoever works their freaking tails off to get things right and then they turn it over to the Iraqis and leave and the next thing you know it all falls to crap. Screw that. If this is going to work at all then there has to be complete control by the colilition, bringing the Iraqis on board slowly and only when you are good and damn sure turning the operation over to them. Yeah, it will take a hell of a long time, and yeah, it means a hell of a lot more troops and yeah, it means more of those troops are going to die. But if that price is too high, then stop dicking around and get the hell out.

0 Replies

VZ, That's not in Bush's playbook. He thinks he's smart enough to ignore all the avaiable expert advisors he has access to. That alone tells us alot, but conservatives see Bush as a "leader."

0 Replies

Hey cicerone imposter, I do not think that either of the choices are in his "playbook" as you say. I don't think they are going to be in the playbook of the next guy, either, no matter whether he is a conservative or a liberal or whatever because they will continue to think that maybe they can get this to work if only they make some adjustments.

0 Replies

VZ, There are only two choices in the "adjustment" concerning Iraq; increase or decrease our troops. Stay the course is what got us to this point; a huge mess with no solutions. Actually, the increase in troops is also out of the mix, because we just don't have them. Bush's surge of 21,500 troops will only get more of our soldiers killed and maimed for a goal that's not being shared with the American People.

0 Replies

Hi CI, hope everything is going great for you.

Vinny,

I'm afraid that Bush will start getting desperate as the inquisitions start dropping his approval ratings even farther this year. Cornered people do dangerous things and Bush has his finger on a lot of buttons.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, TENTH THREAD.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know