Religion, Politics and World Events They make great dinner conversation, don't you think? plus Political Film

Iraqis Say There Should Be Troop Timetable

Old 11-21-05, 10:38 AM
  #1  
Moderator
Thread Starter
 
nemein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: 1bit away from total disaster
Posts: 34,141
Iraqis Say There Should Be Troop Timetable

It's going to be interesting to see how this changes the debate...


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051121/...NlYwMlJVRPUCUl
CAIRO, Egypt - Leaders of
Iraq's sharply divided Shiites, Kurds and Sunnis, seeking common ground for their political future together, agreed Monday there should be a timetable for the withdrawal of foreign troops, and that resistance was the right of all but that acts of terror should be condemned.


After hours of negotiations at the Arab League, the participants in a national accord conference reached a final statement aimed at showing the points of agreement between the communities.

The three-day gathering was held to prepare for a wider conference due to be held in February in Iraq, part of a U.S.-backed league attempt to bring the communities closer together and assure Sunni Arab participation in a political process now dominated by Iraq's Shiite majority and large Kurdish minority.
<b>
The participants in Cairo agreed on "calling for the withdrawal of foreign troops according to a timetable, through putting in place an immediate national program to rebuild the armed forces ... control the borders and the security situation" and end terror attacks.
</b>
"The Iraqi people are looking forward to the day when the foreign forces will leave Iraq, when its armed and security forces will be rebuilt and when they can enjoy peace and stability and get rid of terrorism," the statement said.
<b>
Sunni leaders have been pressing the Shiite-majority government to agree to a timetable for the withdrawal of all foreign troops. The statement recognized that goal, but did not lay down a specific time reflecting instead the government's stance that Iraqi security forces must be built up first.

On Monday, Iraqi Interior Minister Bayan Jabr suggested U.S.-led forces should able to leave Iraq by the end of next year, saying the one-year extension of the mandate for multinational force in Iraq by the
U.N. Security Council earlier this month could be the last.
</b>
"By mid next year we will be 75 percent done in building our forces and by the end of next year it will be fully ready," he told the Arab satellite station Al-Jazeera.

The conference's final statement also stated that "resistance is a legitimate right for all people" a nod to Sunni Arab leaders who have sought to distinguish Iraqi insurgents they say are resisting the U.S. presence in Iraq from terrorism.

But the statement added, "Terrorism is not legitimate resistance and thus we condemn terrorism and the acts of violence, killings and kidnappings that target Iraqi citizens; civil, governmental and humanitarian organizations; national wealth and houses of worships. We ask that they be immediately confronted."

It also condemned the declaring of some Iraqis infidels an ideology advocated by some of the Islamic militants in Iraq's insurgency to justify some of their attacks.

The Cairo meeting was marred by differences between participants at times and at one point saw Shiite and Kurdish delegates storm out of a closed session when one of the speakers said they had sold out to the Americans.

A major goal of the conference was to resolve who can attend the wider gathering in February. Shiites have been skeptical of the conference from the start and strongly opposed participation by Sunni Arab officials from the former Saddam regime or from pro-insurgency groups.

The statement also stressed the participants commitment to the Iraq's unity. It called for releasing all "innocent detainees" who have not been convicted by courts and asked that allegations of torture be investigated and those responsible be held accountable.

The statement also demanded "an immediate stop to arbitrary raids and arrests without a documented judicial order."

Participants asked the Arab countries to support Iraq by eliminating or reducing its debts and strengthening the Arab diplomatic presence in Baghdad.
nemein is offline  
Old 11-21-05, 10:43 AM
  #2  
Enormous Genitals
 
Bandoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: a small cottage on a cul de sac in the lower pits of hell.
Posts: 32,997
If they ask us to leave, what could possibly be our justification for staying?
Bandoman is online now  
Old 11-21-05, 10:46 AM
  #3  
DVD Talk Legend
 
raven56706's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Back in the Good Ole USA
Posts: 21,749
they need to give up the terrorists.... come on.... the terrorists are being helped by the people that live there
raven56706 is offline  
Old 11-21-05, 10:48 AM
  #4  
Moderator
Thread Starter
 
nemein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: 1bit away from total disaster
Posts: 34,141
Originally Posted by Bandoman
If they ask us to leave, what could possibly be our justification for staying?
None IMHO. I think this will be where the rubber mets the road to see if the Bush admin tries to persuade them to change this stance (although it is loosely worded as it is).
nemein is offline  
Old 11-21-05, 10:49 AM
  #5  
Moderator
Thread Starter
 
nemein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: 1bit away from total disaster
Posts: 34,141
Originally Posted by raven56706
they need to give up the terrorists.... come on.... the terrorists are being helped by the people that live there
It looks like english but I have no idea what you are trying to say Who is the "they" and who are "they" giving up the terrorists too?
nemein is offline  
Old 11-21-05, 11:03 AM
  #6  
bhk
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Right of Atilla The Hun
Posts: 19,749
If they ask us to leave, we leave. Unless we have imperial ambitions(which we don't).
bhk is offline  
Old 11-21-05, 11:07 AM
  #7  
X
Administrator
 
X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1987
Location: AA-
Posts: 10,730
Originally Posted by nemein
None IMHO. I think this will be where the rubber mets the road to see if the Bush admin tries to persuade them to change this stance (although it is loosely worded as it is).
Who says the Bush admin didn't ask them to say this, or is at least happy they did? It serves our purposes very well.
X is offline  
Old 11-21-05, 11:13 AM
  #8  
Moderator
Thread Starter
 
nemein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: 1bit away from total disaster
Posts: 34,141
Originally Posted by X
Who says the Bush admin didn't ask them to say this, or is at least happy they did? It serves our purposes very well.
That is certainly a possibility because it given the admin an "out" w/o looking like they are giving in to the Dems.
nemein is offline  
Old 11-21-05, 11:22 AM
  #9  
Enormous Genitals
 
Bandoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: a small cottage on a cul de sac in the lower pits of hell.
Posts: 32,997
Originally Posted by nemein
That is certainly a possibility because it given the admin an "out" w/o looking like they are giving in to the Dems.
If this gives the Bush adminitrations a face-saving way to do the right thing (which it is, IMO), then I'm all for it.
Bandoman is online now  
Old 11-21-05, 11:24 AM
  #10  
DVD Talk Legend
 
raven56706's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Back in the Good Ole USA
Posts: 21,749
Originally Posted by nemein
It looks like english but I have no idea what you are trying to say Who is the "they" and who are "they" giving up the terrorists too?

i was talking about the citizens in iraqi.... they want a timetable for us to leave but the terrorists are still bombing their buildings and killing people....
raven56706 is offline  
Old 11-21-05, 11:27 AM
  #11  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Malvern, PA
Posts: 5,013
The end of 2006 sounds about right.
Goldblum is offline  
Old 11-21-05, 11:27 AM
  #12  
Moderator
Thread Starter
 
nemein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: 1bit away from total disaster
Posts: 34,141
Originally Posted by raven56706
i was talking about the citizens in iraqi.... they want a timetable for us to leave but the terrorists are still bombing their buildings and killing people....
Which is probably why some of them want us to leave. The big question is whether or not the local security forces will be able to handle things after that. Hopefully they'll be strong enough and once it becomes a purely local thing the "street" will definatively turn against the insurgents. The key is though we have to make sure the local forces are atleast strong enough to have fighting chance before we leave. Which is why some of them have said they want us to stay.
nemein is offline  
Old 11-21-05, 11:29 AM
  #13  
Moderator
Thread Starter
 
nemein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: 1bit away from total disaster
Posts: 34,141
Originally Posted by Goldblum
The end of 2006 sounds about right.
I suspect one way or another we'll see some movement/signs before Nov '06... and both sides are going to spin it such that they were responsible
nemein is offline  
Old 11-21-05, 11:35 AM
  #14  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Th0r S1mpson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 36,443
When the Iraqis give us a "timetable" for when they are ready for us to leave, that's when we leave. That's always been the case. If the elected government told us to leave the next day, we would.

Debate has been over whether the U.S. should set its own timetable to pressure the Iraqis to step things up faster and get our boys home. With that I would disagree.

The statements coming out of Cairo are fairly open-ended but encouraging. My hope would be that the insurgency would see that it's Iraqis determining timetables, rather than the US, making us less of an "occupying force" and more of a security force. That point has been driven home many many times, but I don't think it's quite caught on (even here in America) for many people.
Th0r S1mpson is offline  
Old 11-21-05, 01:32 PM
  #15  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
DVD Polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 52,446
Iraqis love us. They really don't want us to leave. They are just scared and need our historical cuddling techniques.
DVD Polizei is offline  
Old 11-21-05, 01:41 PM
  #16  
DVD Talk Ruler
 
General Zod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Posts: 21,393
Originally Posted by Goldblum
The end of 2006 sounds about right.
I think we'll see the "start" of a pullout around then (probably before Nov elections).. How about 2-3 soldiers a month?
General Zod is online now  
Old 11-21-05, 01:53 PM
  #17  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Times Square
Posts: 12,133
Originally Posted by Bandoman
If they ask us to leave, what could possibly be our justification for staying?

The same justification we had for going there in the first place? We gotta find those WMDs!!!!!
marty888 is offline  
Old 11-21-05, 02:09 PM
  #18  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Land of the Lobstrosities
Posts: 10,300
he conference's final statement also stated that "resistance is a legitimate right for all people" a nod to Sunni Arab leaders who have sought to distinguish Iraqi insurgents they say are resisting the U.S. presence in Iraq from terrorism.

But the statement added, "Terrorism is not legitimate resistance and thus we condemn terrorism and the acts of violence, killings and kidnappings that target Iraqi citizens; civil, governmental and humanitarian organizations; national wealth and houses of worships. We ask that they be immediately confronted."
It is an odd position to take that it is a "legitimate right" to kill foreign forces in Iraq that are technically there at the request of the Iraqi government. Of course the legitimacy of that government is in question, and perhaps always will be. I wonder if this right to resist includes killing iraqi police and security forces who fight along side the foreign infidels, or are they covered under governmental organizations?
wmansir is offline  
Old 11-21-05, 02:14 PM
  #19  
Moderator
Thread Starter
 
nemein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: 1bit away from total disaster
Posts: 34,141
Of course the legitimacy of that government is in question, and perhaps always will be.
I doubt it... I mean I'm sure there will always be some who will question it, but I think after the next election, and each election after that it'll continue to gain legitimacy.
nemein is offline  
Old 11-21-05, 02:15 PM
  #20  
Moderator
Thread Starter
 
nemein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: 1bit away from total disaster
Posts: 34,141
Originally Posted by marty888
The same justification we had for going there in the first place? We gotta find those WMDs!!!!!
That's why we've got to get our troops out of Iraq so we can pack them off to Syria Isn't that what the latest conspiracy theory about what the neo-cons are up too postulates?

In a sense I agree though... I don't think there's been enough effort by anyone (here on either side, there, in the UN, etc) to find out exactly where the disconnect was and what happened to all the unaccounted for munitions.
nemein is offline  
Old 11-21-05, 02:34 PM
  #21  
DVD Talk Hero
 
JasonF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 39,460
Originally Posted by nemein
That's why we've got to get our troops out of Iraq so we can pack them off to Syria Isn't that what the latest conspiracy theory about what the neo-cons are up too postulates?
All along, I've thought our long-term goal was to have a base in the region, akin to the way we had Rammstien in Europe during the Cold War. Our boys would sit in the base and growl at Syria, Iran, Jordan, etc. as needed, thereby keeping everyone in the region in line and ensuring (in theory) that the oil flows freely and the terrorists do not.

If Iraq tells us "Sorry, you can't have a base on Iraqi soil," that throws a monkey wrench in this plan.
JasonF is offline  
Old 11-21-05, 03:08 PM
  #22  
Moderator
Thread Starter
 
nemein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: 1bit away from total disaster
Posts: 34,141
All along, I've thought our long-term goal was to have a base in the region, akin to the way we had Rammstien in Europe during the Cold War. Our boys would sit in the base and growl at Syria, Iran, Jordan, etc. as needed, thereby keeping everyone in the region in line and ensuring (in theory) that the oil flows freely and the terrorists do not.

If Iraq tells us "Sorry, you can't have a base on Iraqi soil," that throws a monkey wrench in this plan.
I've heard a lot of talk/speculation about that but it only seems to be coming from the naysayers (and I believe some of the early stuff out the project for a new america [or whatever it is called] mentioned it would be nice to have that) so I'm not really sure how much validity it deserves.

What if the Iraqies say they want us out of the day to day policing of the country but they wouldn't mind if we had a base there? Should we accept?
nemein is offline  
Old 11-21-05, 03:12 PM
  #23  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Did the U. S. err in rushing to grant a measure of sovereignty to Iraq?

I believe we did, because, in ways, I believe it tied our hands.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 11-22-05, 08:17 AM
  #24  
Admin-Thanos
 
VinVega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Caught between the moon and NYC
Posts: 31,516
Originally Posted by classicman2
Did the U. S. err in rushing to grant a measure of sovereignty to Iraq?

I believe we did, because, in ways, I believe it tied our hands.
Did it? I think it give us the perfect exit strategy. When you don't want to be there politically anymore, have the Iraqi government come out and plant a timetable on you. You get out before the next election cycle and don't look like you're turning tail to the American voter. Militarily it does tie our hands, no doubt, but politics plays a part in all of our deployments around the world, no shocker that it plays one here.

Originally Posted by X
Who says the Bush admin didn't ask them to say this, or is at least happy they did? It serves our purposes very well.
X - the first thing I thought when I heard this was this was some sort of discussion with the Iraqi government started by the US.

Originally Posted by nemein
Which is probably why some of them want us to leave. The big question is whether or not the local security forces will be able to handle things after that. Hopefully they'll be strong enough and once it becomes a purely local thing the "street" will definatively turn against the insurgents. The key is though we have to make sure the local forces are atleast strong enough to have fighting chance before we leave. Which is why some of them have said they want us to stay.
Totally agree. The thing is, when you're dealing with xenophobia and you remove the foreign troop element, the motivation amongst the Jihadists is not as strong (are they going to take out their fellow Muslim brothers for a political gain?). The local Iraqis might also take up arms against the Iranians, Saudis, Chechens, and Syrians on their turf. It's a gamble, but so is staying.
VinVega is offline  
Old 11-22-05, 08:20 AM
  #25  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Did it? I think it give us the perfect exit strategy. When you don't want to be there politically anymore, have the Iraqi government come out and plant a timetable on you. You get out before the next election cycle and don't look like you're turning tail to the American voter. Militarily it does tie our hands, no doubt, but politics plays a part in all of our deployments around the world, no shocker that it plays one here.
Militarily is what I'm speaking about.
classicman2 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.