9
   

THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, ELEVENTH THREAD

 
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 May, 2007 05:10 pm
Yes, Iraq is a mess. It promises to become a bigger mess whether we stay or leave. The real question is what in 10 years will be the size of the Iraq mess if we leave now, and, what will be the size of the Iraq mess if we leave in 10 years?
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 May, 2007 05:33 pm
ican711nm wrote:
Yes, Iraq is a mess. It promises to become a bigger mess whether we stay or leave. The real question is what in 10 years will be the size of the Iraq mess if we leave now, and, what will be the size of the Iraq mess if we leave in 10 years?


If we leave now, things might get a little worse or maybe a lot worse. Who really knows? If we stay for 10 years I don't know about Iraq, but I can't imagine our own country can sustain staying there in such force for ten years.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 May, 2007 05:47 pm
Yeah, by then, our government will have to dig up all the dead soldiers to put them into active service again.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 May, 2007 05:54 pm
revel wrote:
ican711nm wrote:
Yes, Iraq is a mess. It promises to become a bigger mess whether we stay or leave. The real question is what in 10 years will be the size of the Iraq mess if we leave now, and, what will be the size of the Iraq mess if we leave in 10 years?


If we leave now, things might get a little worse or maybe a lot worse. Who really knows? If we stay for 10 years I don't know about Iraq, but I can't imagine our own country can sustain staying there in such force for ten years.

Either way, Revel, it is a judgment call. I say stay until we succeed or have exhausted our options. Others say we should leave now before we exhaust our options, because we cannot succeed.

For me it is totally unacceptable to leave before we have done everything we can to help the Iraqi people save themselves ... and thereby save ourselves.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 May, 2007 05:57 pm
As they say in medical school;
The operation was successful even though the patient died.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 May, 2007 06:05 pm
How does "save themselves" equate to "save ourselves?" The Iraqis have been at war with themselves for over one thousand years.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 May, 2007 06:16 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
How does "save themselves" equate to "save ourselves?" The Iraqis have been at war with themselves for over one thousand years.

America's stated, primary objective in Iraq is to defeat the al-Qaeda in Iraq. Al-Qaeda in Iraq's stated primary objective in Iraq is to establish a permanent sanctuary for itself in Iraq from which it could train for and launch many more future terrorist attacks, like those it launched in 2001 in America on 4 US airliners, the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Congress wrote:

Congress's Joint Resolution September 14, 2001
emphasis added
SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
...
(a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.


Congress wrote:

Congress's Joint Resolution Oct. 16, 2002
Public Law 107-243 107th Congress Joint Resolution (H.J. Res. 114) To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.
...
[10th]Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;

[11th]Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of United States citizens;
...
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 May, 2007 06:52 pm
Launch terrorist attacks against the US, how? Have you ever tried to board an airplane lately?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 May, 2007 08:05 pm
Iraqi official: U.S., Iran may talk soon

By EDITH M. LEDERER, Associated Press Writer
53 minutes ago

SHARM EL-SHEIK, Egypt - Iraq's foreign minister said Sunday that he expects to soon see "substantive discussions" among U.S., Iranian and Iraqi diplomats on improving security and stability in his country. But it was unclear if the United States and Iran had agreed to a meeting.

If the Bush administration refuses to seek the political solution necessary to succeed in Iraq, why is Petraeus wasting his energies in trying to be successful, because he told congress and the American People that this war cannot be won only on the military front? Condi Rice already failed to engage the Syrians in dialogue.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 May, 2007 09:26 pm
ican, The stated objective is to train enough Iraqis to fend and secure for themselves; not to get rid of al Qaida. Where do you get your information?
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 May, 2007 07:17 am
Quote:
Al- Zaman reports in Arabic that a new round of fighting and declared enmity between the Mahdi Army of Muqtada al-Sadr and the Badr Corps of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq has has posed new dangers to security in several locales, including East Baghdad, Diwaniya, Najaf and Basra

The battle that Reuters reported this way:


' BAGHDAD - The U.S. military said it had killed up to 10 militants and destroyed a torture room during a raid in Baghdad's Sadr City that targeted suspected members of a cell known for smuggling sophisticated bombs from Iran.'

was, according to al-Zaman, actually a fight between the Mahdi Army and the Badr Corps, in which US helicopters intervened on the side of Badr. Al-Zaman's sources maintain that the Badr Corps is systematically targetting the Mahdi Army, and incarcerating its leaders along with others, breaking down front doors and going into houses where they feel it necessary. It says that residents of the Baghdad neighborhood where their latest clashes took place are disgusted with the behavior of the Badr Corps. It says that US troops incarcerated dozens of Mahdi Army militiamen in Diwaniya and other cities.


source
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 May, 2007 07:23 am
Does it not seem to anyone else that this civil war which seemed to orginally be between the Sunnis who were marginalized after the fall of the Baathist regime and the rise in power of the Shiites has now kind of spread into a gathering war between Sunnis and Shiites all over the middle east?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 May, 2007 09:15 am
revel, It's only one of the many consequences of the Bush War in Iraq. It's ironic that Bush, Petraeus, and all those still supporting the war can't see the carnage of the past, present and future as long as we are seen as occupiers.

Double suicide bombings in Iraq kill 20

By HAMID AHMED, Associated Press Writer
36 minutes ago



BAGHDAD - Two suicide car bombers attacked a market and a police checkpoint on the outskirts of Ramadi on Monday, killing at least 20 people and dealing a blow to recent U.S. success in reclaiming the Sunni city from insurgents.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 May, 2007 04:06 pm
Yeah, things are going great

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/05/07/iraq.sunnithreat/index.html

Quote:
Sunni demand could unravel Iraqi government

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2007/WORLD/meast/05/07/iraq.sunnithreat/newt1.1500.alhashimi.gi.jpg

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Iraq's top Sunni official has set a deadline of next week for pulling his entire bloc out of the government -- a potentially devastating blow to reconciliation efforts within Iraq. He also said he turned down an offer by President Bush to visit Washington until he can count more fully on U.S. help.

Iraqi Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi made his comments in an interview with CNN. He said if key amendments to the Iraq Constitution are not made by May 15, he will step down and pull his 44 Sunni politicians out of the 275-member Iraqi parliament.

"If the constitution is not subject to major changes, definitely, I will tell my constituency frankly that I have made the mistake of my life when I put my endorsement to that national accord," he said.


Specifically, he wants guarantees in the constitution that the country won't be split into Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish federal states that he says will disadvantage Sunnis.

Al-Hashimi's cooperation with Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's government is widely seen as essential if there is to be a realistic chance of bridging the Shiite-Sunni divide in Iraq -- one of the key goals of the Bush administration.

The withdrawal of the Sunni bloc would unravel months of efforts to foster political participation by Sunnis in Iraq's government. It also would further weaken al-Maliki just weeks after Shiite Cabinet ministers allied with Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr bolted from the government.

Al-Hashimi's Iraqi Islamic Party was key in getting Sunnis out to vote in the December 2005 election. Sunnis had been reluctant to take part in the political process, and many were only convinced to do so with the promise of changes to the Iraqi Constitution. Al-Hashimi said the United States co-signed those changes, and now a year and a half later nothing has been done. (Watch al-Hashimi express anger over lack of power-sharingVideo)

Without a change to the constitution, he said, "The situation would be a disaster for Iraq."

He added, "I would like to see the identity of my country, in fact, restored back."

Al-Hashimi said he has expressed his concerns to Bush, and that for now he will not travel to the United States unless he knows it will result in action.

Al-Hashimi was invited to Washington during a recent phone call with Bush. The Iraqi leader said he was "very clear" to Bush that "our [Sunni] participation is quite unfortunately becoming meaningless."

Bush and al-Hashimi have met once before in Washington, in December.

National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe said Bush did invite al-Hashimi to the White House again, as he often does when he speaks with Iraqi leaders.

"No one here is aware of any refusal to come," Johndroe said. "That has not been conveyed to us."

On Monday, the president held a 25-minute videoconference with al-Maliki, the White House and the prime minister's office announced. In Washington, White House spokesman Tony Snow said political reconciliation efforts were "the focal point of those conversations."

Al-Maliki talked about getting leaders of Iraq's major factions together "to sit down in a very practical way and say, 'Let's get this stuff fixed,' " Snow said.

"What you got was a very clear sense from the prime minister that it was important to be making progress," he said.

Al-Maliki's office said Bush will dispatch a senior administration official to Iraq to rally support for the government, while the prime minister "reaffirmed the importance of continuing cooperation and coordination" between U.S. and Iraqi troops now trying to pacify the capital.

Al-Maliki's Shiite-dominated government has been under great pressure politically to develop good relations with Sunnis, who have been alienated from post-Saddam Hussein Iraq and have supported the insurgency.

Sunnis, who prevailed under Hussein despite being a minority in Iraq, are concerned about being shunned from public life as a result of de-Baathification policies and want to be included in the fair sharing of Iraqi oil revenues and other resources.

Al-Hashimi said that his patience is running thin with the government's failure to promote reconciliation and that he feels he is not consulted regularly on key decisions. In addition, he said, he sees growing frustrations within the Sunni community that they are being left out of the political process.

The vice president is feeling the heat on all sides. Al Qaeda in Iraq -- which is made up of Sunni extremists -- recently issued a warning to him, saying he was on the "wrong political path." Al-Hashimi said that al Qaeda is gaining strength in some areas, including parts of Baghdad, because Sunnis were frustrated by the lack of political progress. (Watch al-Hashimi talk about safety in BaghdadVideo)

If Sunnis aren't an equal partner in the government, he said, they should say "bye-bye to the political process."

Asked if that meant all-out civil war with Shiites, he said no.

"I'm not saying that I'm going to war," he said, adding he would not encourage his bloc to get involved with "any sort of violence whatsoever."

At the same time, he said Sunnis will be "frustrated" and people will "think on other alternatives."

But he said he'd also prefer not to reach that point.


Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 May, 2007 04:48 pm
Petraeus told Bush and the congress that diplomacy was necessary to "win" in Iraq. With Malaki losing ground big bit by big bit, his government is a shell without any influence or power. This was obvious before Petraeus made his famous speech about the necessity to win on both the military and diplomatic fronts, and it's obvious he's failed on all fronts. What's the next step? More death and mayhem for those serving in Iraq and all those innocent Iraqi lives. When will enough be enough?
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 May, 2007 04:51 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
Petraeus told Bush and the congress that diplomacy was necessary to "win" in Iraq. With Malaki losing ground big bit by big bit, his government is a shell without any influence or power. This was obvious before Petraeus made his famous speech about the necessity to win on both the military and diplomatic fronts, and it's obvious he's failed on all fronts. What's the next step? More death and mayhem for those serving in Iraq and all those innocent Iraqi lives. When will enough be enough?


Never, because some can never admit when they are wrong.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 May, 2007 05:18 pm
68 killed or found dead in Iraq
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 May, 2007 05:43 pm
Car Bombs Kill 25 at Iraqi Police Checkpoint
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 May, 2007 05:59 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
Launch terrorist attacks against the US, how? Have you ever tried to board an airplane lately?

I sure have tried to board a general aviation airplane lately ... many times ... and succeeded each time. No pre-boarding inspection was ever required.

I sure have tried to board a commercial airliner lately ... many times ... and succeeded each time after my carry-ons and shoes were inspected.

Terrorists after they arrive in the US via commercial airliner, can then rent a car and go to whatever building/hardware supply store they choose to get what they want to steal a general aviation airplane, fill it with high explosives, and fly it into whatever they choose before it can be shot down.

Other terrorists on the ground can start fires wherever they want.

Other terrorists on the ground can steal fire arms and other ordnance from their local gun store, and then murder whoever they choose.

Next question?

Try thinking for yourself. It helps.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 May, 2007 06:05 pm
ican, American born terrorists can do the same. As for your ability to get on any commercial airplane flying into the US, what did you use for ID?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.12 seconds on 07/23/2025 at 04:22:11