THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, ELEVENTH THREAD

The "sign of progress" in Iraq has been going on for five years now; how much longer is this "progress" going to go on?

0 Replies

C I
a logical question that needs some clarification from the people who are partial in their global views

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

The "sign of progress" in Iraq has been going on for five years now; how much longer is this "progress" going to go on?

Hopefully forever, just like progress should go on everywhere.
Progress should never stop.

0 Replies

Mysteryman
I made a short visit and the people- I mean PEOPLE are fed up .
Decency warrants to leave others to settle their problems..

0 Replies

Ramafuchs wrote:

I made a short visit and the people- I mean PEOPLE are fed up .
Decency warrants to leave others to settle their problems..

Could you elaborate on that? The visit, I mean. Thank you.

0 Replies

Yes
I will post a seperate thread in due course

0 Replies

Please send me a pm when you do set up the thread. Thanks.

0 Replies

Bush likes his euphemisms. Nevertheless it is a slight concession but I don't think it will go far enough to please others beside Malaki in Iraq who have been demanding a timetable with specific dates in the first place. If it had been left up to just Maliki, the deal would have done went through already, IMO.

0 Replies

Maliki endorses the Obama plan.

Quote:

Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki told a German magazine he supported prospective U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's proposal that U.S. troops should leave Iraq within 16 months.

"U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes."

Asked if he supported Obama's ideas more than those of John McCain, Republican presidential hopeful, Maliki said he did not want to recommend who people should vote for.

"Whoever is thinking about the shorter term is closer to reality. Artificially extending the stay of U.S. troops would cause problems."

http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed2/idUSL198009020080719

Wow, the 16th month thing is looking more and more likely every day.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

These experiences of military families are daily events for most of them; they contrast with all the "progress" reports coming out of Iraq:

As wars lengthen, toll on military families mounts

By DAVID CRARY, AP National Writer 2 hours, 59 minutes ago

FORT CAMPBELL, Ky. - Far from the combat zones, the strains and separations of no-end-in-sight wars are taking an ever-growing toll on military families despite the armed services' earnest efforts to help.
ADVERTISEMENT

Divorce lawyers see it in the breakup of youthful marriages as long, multiple deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan fuel alienation and mistrust. Domestic violence experts see it in the scuffles that often precede a soldier's departure or sour a briefly joyous homecoming.

Teresa Moss, a counselor at Fort Campbell's Lincoln Elementary School, hears it in the voices of deployed soldiers' children as they meet in groups to share accounts of nightmares, bedwetting and heartache.

"They listen to each other. They hear that they aren't the only ones not able to sleep, having their teachers yell at them," Moss said.

Even for Army spouses with solid marriages, the repeated separations are an ordeal.

"Three deployments in, I still have days when I want to hide under the bed and cry," said Jessica Leonard, who is raising two small children and teaching a "family team building" class to other wives at Fort Campbell. Her husband, Capt. Lance Leonard, is in Iraq.

0 Replies

The stats on the dead and wounded doesn't even come close to the real cost of this war.

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Maliki endorses the Obama plan.

.... and a funny little footnote to that one:

Quote:

White House sends press corps al-Maliki praise for Obama plan

CRAWFORD, TX (CNN) - An embarrassing slip up for the White House press office Saturday, when an aide hit the wrong button and mistakenly sent to the news media a Reuters article saying Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki backs presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama's troop withdrawal plan.

White House spokesman Scott Stanzel says, "It was a mistake. Clips list for staff was supposed to be the addressee."

The Obama campaign quickly took advantage of the mistake, forwarding an ABC report detailing the incident to its press list.

This is not the first time the White House has emailed in error. But its timing is particularly embarrassing as the Bush administration's recent agreement with al-Maliki on a "general time horizon" for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq is being cited by some as resembling Obama's proposal that U.S. forces should leave within 16 months.

0 Replies

that's a good one !
jon stewart will have a lot of fun with that on the daily show , i bet ! :wink:
hbg

0 Replies

"As soon as possible, as far a we're concerned."

0 Replies

old europe wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Maliki endorses the Obama plan.

.... and a funny little footnote to that one:

Quote:
White House sends press corps al-Maliki praise for Obama plan

CRAWFORD, TX (CNN) - An embarrassing slip up for the White House press office Saturday, when an aide hit the wrong button and mistakenly sent to the news media a Reuters article saying Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki backs presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama's troop withdrawal plan.

White House spokesman Scott Stanzel says, "It was a mistake. Clips list for staff was supposed to be the addressee."

The Obama campaign quickly took advantage of the mistake, forwarding an ABC report detailing the incident to its press list.

This is not the first time the White House has emailed in error. But its timing is particularly embarrassing as the Bush administration's recent agreement with al-Maliki on a "general time horizon" for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq is being cited by some as resembling Obama's proposal that U.S. forces should leave within 16 months.

0 Replies

It was obvious when Bush used the word "horizon," that he had no intention of agreeing to a "time-line" certain. Iraq's oil is too valuable to abandon.

******************

Bush adviser says Iraq timeline "very dangerous"

Sun Jul 20, 1:08 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush's top military adviser said on Sunday setting an unconditional two-year timetable for getting U.S. troops out of Iraq in two years would be dangerous.

But Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said he would be able to recommend more troop reductions this fall if conditions there continued to improve.

Asked about a hypothetical two-year withdrawal timeline, Mullen told "Fox News Sunday, "I think the consequences could be very dangerous."

"I'm convinced (that) making reductions based on conditions on the ground are very important. We've been able to do that. We've reduced five brigades in the last several months and, again, if conditions continue to improve, I would be able to make recommendations to President Bush in the fall to continue those reductions."

The White House said on Friday that Bush, who has long opposed any set schedule for a withdrawal, had agreed with Iraq's prime minister to consider a "time horizon."

Mullen said such a goal, which would be part of a security agreement being negotiated between the two countries, sends a signal that "eventually we do want to bring our troops home."

He said his mission from Bush was to advise on troop withdrawals "exclusively based on conditions on the ground."

0 Replies

Maliki seems to be walking a slippery tightrope between the Bush administration and the others in power in Iraq who object to a long term presence in Iraq. I wonder if he thinks he will get something out of the Bush administration if he signs the security deal and does not commit them to a definite timetable? It is like he is trying to appease both sides by talking out of both sides of his mouth and is getting caught up all over the place and I just wonder what his angle is.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

"As soon as possible, as far a we're concerned."

Iraq PM did not back Obama troop exit plan: government

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki did not back the plan of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq and his comments to a German magazine on the issue were misunderstood, the government's spokesman said on Sunday.

Ali al-Dabbagh said in a statement that Maliki's remarks to Der Spiegel were translated incorrectly.

The German magazine said on Saturday that Maliki supported Obama's proposal that U.S. troops should leave Iraq within 16 months. The interview was released on Saturday.

"U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right time frame for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes," Der Spiegel quoted Maliki as saying.

Dabbagh said statements by Maliki or any other member of the government should not be seen as support for any U.S. presidential candidate.

Obama is visiting Afghanistan and is set to go to Iraq as part of a tour of Europe and the Middle East.

Maliki's remarks were published a day after the White House said he and President George W. Bush had agreed that a security agreement currently being negotiated between them should include a "time horizon" for withdrawal of U.S. troops.

Bush has long opposed setting a timetable for withdrawal, and the White House said the time horizon agreed by the two leaders was not as specific as a time frame pushed by Democrats and could be adjusted based on conditions on the ground.

0 Replies

This has already been discussed on this thread at length.

0 Replies

THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, ELEVENTH THREAD

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know