Sounds good to me.
Ping
If it makes France shut up, I'm all for it. This doesn't really sound like we've given up anything. And, of course, we reserve the right to protect our national security interests at any time anyway, so we can always have a return engagement. :)
So, if UKUS troops have to leave when asked, they're under the control of Allawi's govt.
AKA - Allawi's militia!
Wouldn't it be great if the Allawi govt is more aggressive against the jihadis.
Captain Bush leads the USA team to another score! And the crowd goes wild!
(Iraq won't want our troops out any more than Germany does)
Interview by Lee Rodgers with someone (Michael Ledeen?) this am. Explained some of the screwing around in Fallujah.
A local station here has a recently retired Marine officer that is still in contact with people in the military in Iraq. He claimed, at the time, that the Marines were NOT happy campers because they’d intended to go in and mop up. He claimed their pull-back consisted of their biting their tongues and doing what they were told.
Then Bush had his speech and claimed that the pullout was a military, not political decision.
Then the guy today, who claimed it was all about the Iraqi Governing Council not wanting the Marines in there. Supposedly, they all threatened to resign if they were not pulled back. Bremer pitched a fit (with us) and *poof* the Marines were pulled back.
Hmmm.
Let's just hope we don't get the boot right before Nov.
Telling us that we aren't needed any longer by the Iraqis because they can handle their security from here (if that's what they do after they have direct elections this September, or January at the latest) would be a big boost to Bush popularity. He could then really say, "Mission Accomplished." We should have a parade and the whole nine yards. Invite Kerry, Kennedy, and Daschle to the victory parade. Give them US flags to wave. It'll be a hoot.
If the new Iraqi government wants us to stay after June 30, then they should be willing to pay ALL OF THE CONTINUING COSTS OF THE OCCUPATION. If not, we should send the bill to the UN.
What's the point of going to the UN again? The UN was showed the door when the US wanted to go into Iraq, so why is the US trying to show legitimacy once more to the UN?
"The United States and Britain revised their Security Council resolution on transferring sovereignty to Iraq on Friday, giving the country's new interim government authority to order the U.S.-led multinational force to leave at any time."
WHY did we go there? To be forced to leave at the whim of any government which constitutes itself?
What about Iran and its nuclear weapons program?
What about Syria and the assistance being renedered to worldwide terrorists?
What about the WMD which might very well still be buried somewhere in that desolation?
Suppose the Baathists take over again, free Saddam, put him back in power, and tell us to go home???
Amazing.
I frequent another board (which shall remain nameless) and the libs are trying to spin it so badly.
One guy was like "We don't have to spin this since its what Kerry has been calling for all along."
I was like, "Oh they'll spin it. Or they are going to have to drop it off the stump speech. And you know they aren't going to do that."
This little concession has them at a loss... For that alone it's worth it.
Big whoop... the Pope is a Pro-Life Democrat.
Will it also let them restore Saddam?
What if the Iraq Arabs voted us out, despite the protests of Kurds? And then porceeded to attack the Iraqi Kurds?
That sort of thing has happened twice before.
It would be a shame if it happened a third time.
Fine with me, but I don't see them doing that anytime soon. Who else is protecting these leaders?