Posted on 02/10/2008 12:53:35 PM PST by SandRat
WASHINGTON, Feb. 10, 2008 – The United States does not plan to establish permanent bases in Iraq, President Bush said today.
Appearing on “Fox News Sunday,” Bush told host Chris Wallace that the best interests of the United States and Iraq would guide any agreement on long-term U.S. presence in Iraq, just as similar agreements are in place between the United States and other countries that host U.S. forces.
“We will be there at the invitation of the Iraqi government,” he said. “And we won’t have permanent bases.”
For the near term, Bush said, he’ll make decisions on the next steps in Iraq when military leaders provide their next reports and recommendations in the spring. Navy Adm. Michael G. Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; Navy Adm. William J. Fallon, commander of U.S. Central Command; and Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of Multinational Force Iraq, are slated to present their recommendations to Bush in April.
Bush said he met with Petraeus in Kuwait during a recent trip to the Middle East, and that he urged the general to base his recommendations on whatever is necessary for success in Iraq, which he defined as having enough security and stability for reconciliation to take place and for the country’s democracy to take hold.
“My message to the general was, ‘Success is paramount. Therefore, whatever you recommend, make it based upon the need to succeed,’” Bush said. “I'm not sure what his recommendation will be, nor am I sure what the recommendation will be of the Pentagon. … They may be all the same; they may not be all the same.
“But I will listen, give them careful consideration, and make up my mind,” the president said. “But it's going to be based upon whether or not we can succeed.”
{cough!} Uh...OK.
ha ha, depends on what the meaning of the word “permanent” is
Technically they won't be permanent, "only" long-term. Agreements with the Iraqis are underway. Unless Obama is elected we will remain in Iraq for at least a decade.
Don’t need permanent bases in Iraq. Saudi will do just fine.
Just based on what I have read about that part of the middle east it wont be inhabitable I think he read that too.
Yeah; McCain’s “leave them there for a hundred years” isn’t permanent....
At least on the geological time scale.
Permanent is such an extreme word...I would venture to say that we have no “permanent” bases anywhere in the world.
It’s not about the Iraqis, it’s about America. We didn’t stay in Germany and Korea to make them happy, but to keep off the Communists. We need to remain in Iraq for years foremostly against Iran and to deny the terrorists another foothold.
Yep...”Permanent” is forever. Several decades should suffice, just as it has in South Korea and Europe.
Right...just like our “temporary” bases in post-war Japan, German, Korea and Okinawa.
Now, about those “temporary” bases...
Why then do we still have "permanent bases" in Japan, Germany and So. Korea, not to mention in many other countries?
Let the damn Iraq’s grow and take care of their selves.
Img src = "http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2007/04/469758086_051b1dd752.jpg">
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.