Iraqi Lawmakers Call For Foreign Troops to Withdraw

[sabra]

<<SNIP>>
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=925971&C=america

Iraqi Lawmakers Call For Foreign Troops to Withdraw
By AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE, BAGHDAD


Iraqi lawmakers from across the political spectrum called for the withdrawal of foreign forces from their country in a letter released to the media June 19.

The move comes as U.S. President George W. Bush is under increasing domestic pressure to set a timetable for the pullout of American forces in the face of an increasing death toll at the hands of insurgents.

Eighty-two Shiite, Kurdish, Sunni Arab, Christian and communist deputies made the call in a letter sent by Falah Hassan Shanshal of the United Iraqi Alliance (UIA), the largest group in parliament, to speaker Hajem al-Hassani.

Some of those who signed urged that a detailed timetable be established for the withdrawal.

<</SNIP>>

[Miss Chybil]

1. Is this for real? This could be it! Oh, please, let it be over..... nt

[Sanity Claws]

2. Great!!

So if we are there to spread democracy, then we should listen to the so-called democratically elected government.
Okay, georgie-porgie, start withdrawing.

[Miss Chybil]

3. I'm sure he has said we would leave when they asked us to leave.

Didn't he? I wonder what the Iraqi PM has to say, or what power he has?

[rodeodance]

8. yes, Jr has said that a lot of times.

[FreedomAngel82]

13. Exactly!

If Bush doesn't agree to this then it will show the people that he just did go there for oil. Bush has to respect this or it will ruin his reptuation on "freedom" and "democracy" with the public. He's stuck in a rut now! I wonder what came to this though. I remember reading eariler this year that the Iraqi government didn't want the military to leave and wouldn't be ready to leave yet. So I wonder what's up.

[Horse with no Name]

4. Legit?

I distinctly remember reading that Bush said that we would only stay as long as they wanted us there.
I suppose these are our walking papers--let's see what happens now.
:popcorn:

[Goldmund]

5. I seem to remember Bush explicitly saying...

...that if the US were asked to leave, they would.

Of course, this is an unofficial letter -- the puppet government there won't allow this to become an actual official resolution.

[Qanisqineq]

14. YES YES YES! I remember that too!!

TIME TO GET THE FUCK OUT GEORGE!

[katty]

41. Hey georgie: THEY WANT U.S. OUT of IRAQ-GET IT??!!!

[central scrutinizer]

6. But, but, but they are still sitting on OUR oil!!!

Goddammit, we are not leaving without our oil.

[EFerrari]

7. Hmm. The parliment wants us to leave but the puppet gov

is still pandering to Bu$hco.

Their executive branch is appropriating the parliment's powers. Yes, we've taken American style "democracy" to Iraq all right. :eyes:

[evermind]

28. Is it the whole parliament, or a minority group within it? It doesn't

seem clear from the article..?

[EFerrari]

32. It's clearly people from the majority party in the parliment

along with the smaller factions.

And, apparently they've sent MULTIPLE requests. :eyes:

[acmavm]

9. Oh yeah, I can really see this happening. Right after pigs learn to fly.

.

[IChing]

10. Rice said we have a generational commitment to our bases in Iraq,

I mean to Iraq.

I wonder if this will ever get play in the MSM, guess I'll have to wait a month to see.
But sounds like a great first step for alternative information to fuel the withdrawal debate

[jaxx]

11. This must mean we are now listed as "Occupiers" instead of rescuers.

Bring em home..........alive!

[FreedomAngel82]

16. We've always been occupiers

But now to a lot of the public we'll be considered occupiers. This news needs to get out there.

[UpInArms]

12. I hope they (the Iraqis) all tell the BFEE not to let the door

hit them in the ass on the way out.

[underpants]

15. WWWWWWWWWWWWHOOPS

Damn look what happens when Sistani forces your hand and makes you give "one man one vote" instead of your occupying force appointing puppets.

All those "What if the new Iraqi government...." and the "They won't do that" answers are all out the window now.

[FreedomAngel82]

17. Something else I noticed

is the Christians in the country are also telling them to get out. I'm glad of that because of the Christians in this country. Who can deny a wish of a fellow brother/sister through Christ? If Bush is a real Christian he would respect what they want.

[expatriot]

18. 82 out of 275

signed the letter. I wonder what the count would be in an "up or down" vote. There are still a lot of "establishment" Shia who want us to stay because they are scared as hell of the anarchy/power vacuum that would ensue.

[Miss Chybil]

19. I knew somebody would come along and bust my bubble...

Oh well, it was a good dream. I guess it's what I get for only reading the exerpt and not the entire article. Here's another important tidbit...

"In the letter, Shanshal said the 275-member parliament was the Iraqi people’s legitimate representative and guardian of their interests.

”We have asked in several sessions for occupation troops to withdraw,” the letter said. “Our request was ignored.”

”It is dangerous that the Iraqi government has asked the U.N. Security Council to prolong the stay of occupation forces without consulting representatives of the people who have the mandate for such a decision. "

[Igel]

39. Every representative body has to deal with the same kinds of

people.

The assembly is the people's legitimate representative and guardian.

The individuals are not, except when they act as an assembly.

It's an important distinction to make.

[mom cat]

35. And some of the politicos in Iraq getting rich off this war do not want

us to leave. They don't want to lose their money or their lives.

[rocktivity]

20. WHAT!!! That's the most treasonous thing I've heard of!

How ungrateful can you get? And where the hell do they get off making decisions about their OWN country???

:rofl:
rocknation

[damntexdem]

21. OK, that's the sign.

Let the troop withdrawals begin!

And Dubya doesn't even have to declare victory: he already did that two years ago, before most of the U.S. deaths in Iraq.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Karenina]

26. Leave and go clean up

Your OWN backyard. You'll have plenty of time to check in on "them" after you've done so. They MAY surprise you!

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[geek tragedy]

23. I wonder what how Sistani would react to this. eom

[rodeodance]

24. looks like their parliment is have a disagreement with the boss!!

In the letter, Shanshal said the 275-member parliament was the Iraqi people’s legitimate representative and guardian of their interests.

”We have asked in several sessions for occupation troops to withdraw,” the letter said. “Our request was ignored.”

”It is dangerous that the Iraqi government has asked the U.N. Security Council to prolong the stay of occupation forces without consulting representatives of the people who have the mandate for such a decision.......

[geek tragedy]

25. Who's "the boss?" (And NO Tony Danza jokes, dammit) nt

[Disturbed]

30. Al Sistani and al Sadr have more...

real on the ground political support than the top Iraqi Govt. officials.

I have predicted for many months that one day that the Sunnis and Shi'ites will unite behind this one cause: End the U.S. Occupation. When that happens the Bush Regime will be forced out.

[geek tragedy]

31. You're right about Sistani and Sadr. My guess is that Sistani is still

posturing the Shiites for the post-occupation political situation. That will change sooner or later. It's a very complex game that's being played right now.

[VegasWolf]

29. Bush's worst nightmare, now what cover for stealing the oil? nt

[Disturbed]

34. Al Sadr has been working on a Sunni Alliance.

The Bush Regime is working on some sort of deal with the more moderate elements of the Insurgency, meaning the non-Al Q. factions, to get them involved in Iraq power sharing. No word on any progress with that.

Al Sadr is al Sistani's leutenant, in my view. Al Sistani has much sway over al Sadr and his followers as evidenced in the past when al Sadr backed down in his war against the Occupation. Al Sistani is an extremely patient person but I sense that even his patience is wearing thin now that the U.S. is waging a heavy offensive against all Iraqis, not just the Insurgency. All it would take is al Sistani's directive to all Iraqis that the Occupation shall cease and a few million Iraqis will rise up.

[oblivious]

33. "Eighty-two Shiite, Kurdish, Sunni Arab, Christian and communist deputies"

So much for the theory that the civil war that would result from the invaders leaving would be far more bloody than the current war.

I guess if these people aren't afraid of the aftermath, the war apologists can stop using this reason for staying.

They'll just have to admit that, as Dick Cheney said, "the country that controls the Middle East oil can exercise a "stranglehold" over the global economy."

And for that reason, the US will stay.

[Terran1212]

36. Iraqis have been wanting US to leave for two years, nothing new

But have the Establishment's goals already been achieved? Are they always 2 steps ahead of us?

Time will tell.

[barb162]

37. Bush will have his finger up his nose on this one

Gee Dick (Cheney), whadda we gonna do now?

[NNN0LHI]

38. Do we have to put the Saddam statues back up? n/t

[TankLV]

40. "Oh oh, Boss!" - "Now - Rochester......!"

Where's Jack Benny when you need 'em?!

[IChing]

42. evening kick N/T

[aneerkoinos]

43. The pro-Iraq Iraqis

From the look of it, these pro-Iraq Iraqis are sadly a minority in parliament (Sunnis, Sadrist Shias, "commies" etc.).

The governement is coalition of pro-Iran (Sistani, SCIRI+Badr, Dawa) and pro-US (Kurds) forces. And for time being it seems neither US nor Iran wan't strong nationalistic Iraq to emerge; in this situation it still serves Iran's interests to have main bulk of US' fighting forces tied in North-West Iraq while Iran builds up it's influence in the South.

It seems US plan is to attack Iran from Azerbaidzan, with support from Kurdish Peshmerga based "Iraqi"-Army, who would not mind annexing the Kurdi-parts of Iran to their new state, plus some other groups. Iran calculates that as lond as bulk of US troops are tied fighting resistance, US will have very hard time gathering enough troops to invade Iran; and should US succeed in collecting enough troops in Azerbaidzan, Pro-Iran Iraqi's (Badr corps "Iraq"-army) would switch side ally with Sunni resistance and Sadrists (and probably Syria too and possibly with even some level of Turkish support against Kurds) to destroy US and Coalition forces remaining in Iraq, leaving US invading army in the North (Azerbaidzhan and Kurdistan) secluded and threatening also US presence in Kuwait.

Or what do I know...

[aneerkoinos]

48. Azerbaidzhan

So the word seems to that US will invade from Azerbaidzan (and Iraqi Kurds will join too).

Pros:
Azerbaidzan is presidential dictaturship; border with on the Caspian see (lot's of nat gaz and some oil) disputed; ethnic division of Iran, with about 20% Azeris and 10% Kurds agaist 50% Farsi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Demographics_of_Iran) and the Washington hope that Iranian Azeris and Kurds would side with US invaders and supply some or lot of the manpower (cf Afganistan war); shortest route to Tehran.
Neutral:
Azerbaidzan has close relations with Turkey, which might make Turkey friendly to Washington plans. Negated with Turkish strong opposition to Kurds snapping part of Iran.
Cons:
No direct supply line via land or sea (gotta get that heavy mechinized stuff there plus all the other supplies, airlift not enough) - in practice only possible route is via Georgia, which means Turkey must agree to let the ships through Bosporus and Russia (and her allies in Georgia) don't get too nasty; route to Tehran very mountanous: first the mountains close to Azeri border, if the locals Azeris support US not a big problem, but then must cross the very high mountains between Caspian See plains and Tehran.

[IndianaGreen]

44. Since Bush is the de-facto ruler of Iraq, and since he was ruled out

troops withdrawals, these good Iraqi lawmakers may well find themselves being labeled as terrorists and end up as guests of one of our fine facilities in the American gulag.

[ngGale]

45. Seems I do remember, Bush saying...

if they asked us to leave - we would. Like he is ever going to with all the new bases. Then, talk about an insurgency!

[Roland99]

46. Just how "sovereign" is Iraq? We're about to find out.

[JawJaw]

47. But Bush

doesn't listen to focus groups, does he?