November 21, 2005, Reprehensible cowards
One might suppose that would be Dick Cheney's answer to a group of over 100 Iraqi officials lawmakers who, at a pan-Arab conference in Cairo, demanded a timetable for the departure of all foreign troops from Iraq.
Gutless bastards. Damned cowards. Let's just let Mean Jean Schmidt deal with them, shall we?
Things do seem to be unravelling on that script. Honestly, if this "pullout timetable" talk persists for more than a few more days, it may make it really embarassing when the withdrawal plan that's on Rummy's desk gets implemented (lest the GOP lose one or both Houses of Congress in the '06 mid-terms by continuing to have their President offer no end in sight to a by-then- even- more-unpopular-war.)
It seems the President can't get back from his lackluster trip to Asia soon enough.
Damn. Can't anyone stay on message? We're tough! We will stay the course! We won't cut and run! We didn't get a harumph out of you!
Comments
...over 100 Iraqi officials lawmakers who, at a pan-Arab conference in Cairo, demanded a timetable for the departure of all foreign troops from Iraq.
Over 100, eh? Assuming these lawmakers are all members of Iraq's parliament, how many total members are in the body? Ans: 275. It would seem they are decidedly of the minority view among Iraq's elected leaders, who earlier this summer voted against an immediate withdrawal of coalition forces. We're constantly told that Iraqis don't want us there, but it seems they don't like Murtha's plan to immediately withdraw.
Posted by Lawrence at November 22, 2005 10:51 AM
The link provided to Truth Laid Bear doesn't seem to say anything at all about what Iraqis want vis a vis Murtha's proposal or any other; it just seems to be a history of various Republican bills to accelerate the withdrawal timetable that were introduced for the purpose of being voted down.
I do agree that those who want the U.S. to withdraw NOW should get off the damned fence and just say so, and not propose some bogus, fence-sitting intermediate plan (6 months, 1 year, 3 years... whatever). Reality is it will take some months to logistically do it, but you can certainly say "start the pullout tomorrow, and do the best we can to complete it in X months, by which time, we will then assign full command and control of all regions to the new SOVEREIGN Iraqi government." (I'm coming 'round to pretty much agreeing with that, btw; I think we have reached diminishing returns in Iraq, and most importantly, don't have the resources to deal with our REAL problems, i.e. Iran/North Korea/Pakistan and nuclear weapons, while they are tied up in Iraq. We are NOT-- by and large-- fighting "foreign terrorists" in Iraq (though they are certainly part of the mix); the vast bulk of the fighting is against Iraqi elements, including Baathists, against whom we are semi-allied with some very, very unsavory Shia and SCIRI elements and who we occasionally are also fighting... anyway... it's an unpleasant scenario, and frankly, if the sovereign nation of Iraq may be telling us they want us to leave... well we should welcome such an event, as solving a lot of our problems for us. Yes, Iraq will be left a mess. BUT... the UNITED STATES has other interests, which the Iraqi adventure is making it virtually impossible to deal with, and those outweigh the mess in Iraq.)
If this Iraqi desire for us to leave is the case, that would clinch it, in my view.
And there you go. If the Iraqis in Cairo do, in fact speak for the new SOVEREIGN Iraqi government, and that government really does want us to leave, we have ALREADY said we'd honor its wishes and leave; we even said if the interim government asked us to leave, we would leave.
So what's the problem? Perceived surrender? To whom? We are in the place as the guests of the now SOVEREIGN Iraqi nation. If we, as the guests of that nation, are told our protection is no longer needed... it would be time to go.
So what's the problem? If this is not the will or the new SOVEREIGN Iraqi government (that we're propping up) we'll soon find that out too.
But I would treat these machinations from the Iraqi government-- if they're true, of course-- as a welcome development. A most welcome development.
Posted by the talking dog at November 22, 2005 1:21 PM
If the Iraqi government tells us to leave, we should and will leave. But that hasn't happned. They know they're not quite up to speed on the police and military front yet. The last count I heard, which was a few months ago, only 82 out of the 275 members of Iraq's parliament wanted the U.S. to leave immediately.
We're going to draw down eventually, of course, whether or not the Iraqi government asks us, so I wonder if part of this charade being put on by Democrats is part of a plan to claim victory once it does happen. They can say, "See? Bush is finally doing what we said."
Posted by Lawrence at November 22, 2005 4:11 PM
More on what Iraq wants: Iraq says troop pullout will lead to violence.
"TOKYO (Reuters) - Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshiyar Zebari urged Japan on Friday to keep its troops in southern Iraq, saying an early pullout of coalition forces would lead to more violence by insurgents.
"Zebari said his war-torn country had made progress on improving security, but added it faced a crucial period ahead of the December 15 parliamentary election.
" 'The difficult part has gone in my view. We're very close to reaching a more stable form of government and of security,' Zebari told a news conference following a meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi.
" 'Now, any premature withdrawal will send the wrong message to the terrorists, to the opposition ... that this coalition is fracturing and running, that their policies and strategies of undermining this process is winning.' "
I trust the TD household had a great Thanksgiving Day.
Posted by Lawrence at November 25, 2005 8:29 AM