Iraq Agrees To Long-Term U.S. Presence
John Edwards, right, leaves a federal courthouse during the eighth day of jury deliberations with his daughter Cate, left, in his trial on charges of campaign corruption in Greensboro, N.C., Wednesday, May 30, 2012. The judge in John Edwards? campaign corruption trial says she has received a note from a juror on Wednesday. (AP Photo/Chuck Burton) / Chuck Burton
President Bush on Monday signed a deal setting the foundation for a potential long-term U.S. troop presence in Iraq, with details to be negotiated over matters that have defined the war debate at home - how many U.S. forces will stay in the country, and for how long.
The agreement between Mr. Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki confirms that the United States and Iraq will hash out an "enduring" relationship in military, economic and political terms.
CBS News' Pete Gow in Baghdad reports the proposals are to offer the U.S. a continued military presence in Iraq, as well as favorable business interests (such as investment opportunities for American companies), in return for guarantees to Iraq's future security.
Lieutenant General Douglas Lute told White House reporters the shape and size of any long-term military presence will be determined in negotiations planned for next year. CBS News White House correspondent Peter Maer reports that, according to Lute, today's agreement sets the agenda for those talks, with a completion goal of July 2008, when the U.S. intends to finish withdrawing the five combat brigades sent in 2007 as part of the current troop "surge."
"What U.S. troops are doing, how many troops are required to do that, are bases required, which partners will join them - all these things are on the negotiating table," said Lute, President Bush's adviser on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The proposal underlines how the United States and Iraq are exploring what their relationship might look like once the U.S. significantly draws down its troop presence. It comes as a Democratic Congress - unsuccessfully, so far - prods Mr. Bush to withdraw troops faster than he wants.
The "declaration of principles" was discussed in a secret meeting of Iraq's Parliament today, Gow reports, and was later signed by President Bush and al-Maliki during a secure video conference Monday morning.
Al-Maliki, in a televised address, said his government would ask the United Nations to renew the mandate for the multinational force for one final time with its authorization to end in 2008.
The U.S.-Iraq agreement will replace the present U.N. mandate regulating the presence of the U.S.-led forces in Iraq. Al-Maliki said the agreement provides for U.S. support for the "democratic regime in Iraq against domestic and external dangers."
It also would help the Iraqi government thwart any attempt to suspend or repeal a constitution drafted with U.S. help and adopted in a nationwide vote in 2005. That appeared to be a reference to any attempt to remove the government by violence or in a coup.
Al-Maliki said the renewal of the multinational forces' mandate was conditional on the repeal of what he called restrictions on Iraqi sovereignty introduced in 1990 by the U.N. Security Council to punish Iraq for invading neighboring Kuwait.
The new agreement would not signal an end to the U.S. mission here. But it could change the rules under which U.S. soldiers operate and give the Iraqis a greater role in determining their mission.
Two senior Iraqi officials familiar with the issue say Iraq's government will embrace a long-term U.S. troop presence in return for U.S. security guarantees as part of a strategic partnership. The two officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the subject is sensitive, said U.S. military and diplomatic representatives appeared generally favorable, subject to negotiations on the details, which include preferential treatment for American investments.
Preferential treatment for U.S. investors could provide a huge windfall if Iraq can achieve enough stability to exploit its vast oil resources. Such a deal would also enable the United States to maintain leverage against Iranian expansion at a time of growing fears about Tehran's nuclear aspirations.
The framework Mr. Bush approved outlines broad principles, such as that both countries will support Iraq's economic institutions, and help its government train Iraqi security forces to provide stability for all Iraqis. Lute said "all major national leaders of the existing Iraqi government" have committed to it.
"The basic message here should be clear: Iraq is increasingly able to stand on its own; that's very good news, but it won't have to stand alone," said Lute, who rarely holds televised briefings.
He said it is too soon to tell what the "shape and size" of the U.S. military commitment will look like, including military bases.
The Iraqi officials said that under the proposed formula, Iraq would get full responsibility for internal security and U.S. troops would relocate to bases outside the cities. Iraqi officials foresee a long-term presence of about 50,000 U.S. troops, down from the current figure of more than 160,000.
In other developments:
Shiite legislators on Monday denounced a draft bill to ease curbs on ex-Saddam Hussein loyalists in government services, dampening hopes of progress for the U.S.-backed legislation aimed at promoting national reconciliation.
Masked gunmen stormed the family home of a pro-Baath journalist and killed 11 of his relatives, colleagues said Monday. Dhia al-Kawaz, editor of the Jordan-based Asawat al-Iraq news agency, was in Jordan when his sisters, their husbands and children were reportedly killed in Baghdad. According to the news agency's Web site, witnesses said more than five masked gunmen broke into the home and opened fire, then planted a bomb inside. "Sectarian militias killed 11 family members of Dhia al-Kawaz," the agency's statement said, apparently referring to Shiite death squads that frequently target minority Sunnis and their supporters.
At least two people - a civilian and a policeman - were killed Monday in separate drive-by shootings by gunmen on motorcycles in the predominantly Shiite city of Kut, 100 miles southeast of Baghdad, police said.
Iraq's most influential Shiite politician said Sunday that the U.S had not backed up claims that Iran is fueling sectarian violence, underscoring a wide gap on the issue between Washington and the Shiite-led Baghdad government. The Americans have long accused the Iranians of arming and training Shiite militias. "These are only accusations raised by the multinational forces and I think these accusations need more proof," Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, leader of the Supreme Islamic Iraq Council, told reporters.
© 2009 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report. The agreement between Mr. Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki confirms that the United States and Iraq will hash out an "enduring" relationship in military, economic and political terms.
CBS News' Pete Gow in Baghdad reports the proposals are to offer the U.S. a continued military presence in Iraq, as well as favorable business interests (such as investment opportunities for American companies), in return for guarantees to Iraq's future security.
Lieutenant General Douglas Lute told White House reporters the shape and size of any long-term military presence will be determined in negotiations planned for next year. CBS News White House correspondent Peter Maer reports that, according to Lute, today's agreement sets the agenda for those talks, with a completion goal of July 2008, when the U.S. intends to finish withdrawing the five combat brigades sent in 2007 as part of the current troop "surge."
"What U.S. troops are doing, how many troops are required to do that, are bases required, which partners will join them - all these things are on the negotiating table," said Lute, President Bush's adviser on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The proposal underlines how the United States and Iraq are exploring what their relationship might look like once the U.S. significantly draws down its troop presence. It comes as a Democratic Congress - unsuccessfully, so far - prods Mr. Bush to withdraw troops faster than he wants.
The "declaration of principles" was discussed in a secret meeting of Iraq's Parliament today, Gow reports, and was later signed by President Bush and al-Maliki during a secure video conference Monday morning.
Al-Maliki, in a televised address, said his government would ask the United Nations to renew the mandate for the multinational force for one final time with its authorization to end in 2008.
The U.S.-Iraq agreement will replace the present U.N. mandate regulating the presence of the U.S.-led forces in Iraq. Al-Maliki said the agreement provides for U.S. support for the "democratic regime in Iraq against domestic and external dangers."
It also would help the Iraqi government thwart any attempt to suspend or repeal a constitution drafted with U.S. help and adopted in a nationwide vote in 2005. That appeared to be a reference to any attempt to remove the government by violence or in a coup.
Al-Maliki said the renewal of the multinational forces' mandate was conditional on the repeal of what he called restrictions on Iraqi sovereignty introduced in 1990 by the U.N. Security Council to punish Iraq for invading neighboring Kuwait.
The new agreement would not signal an end to the U.S. mission here. But it could change the rules under which U.S. soldiers operate and give the Iraqis a greater role in determining their mission.
Two senior Iraqi officials familiar with the issue say Iraq's government will embrace a long-term U.S. troop presence in return for U.S. security guarantees as part of a strategic partnership. The two officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the subject is sensitive, said U.S. military and diplomatic representatives appeared generally favorable, subject to negotiations on the details, which include preferential treatment for American investments.
Preferential treatment for U.S. investors could provide a huge windfall if Iraq can achieve enough stability to exploit its vast oil resources. Such a deal would also enable the United States to maintain leverage against Iranian expansion at a time of growing fears about Tehran's nuclear aspirations.
The framework Mr. Bush approved outlines broad principles, such as that both countries will support Iraq's economic institutions, and help its government train Iraqi security forces to provide stability for all Iraqis. Lute said "all major national leaders of the existing Iraqi government" have committed to it.
"The basic message here should be clear: Iraq is increasingly able to stand on its own; that's very good news, but it won't have to stand alone," said Lute, who rarely holds televised briefings.
He said it is too soon to tell what the "shape and size" of the U.S. military commitment will look like, including military bases.
The Iraqi officials said that under the proposed formula, Iraq would get full responsibility for internal security and U.S. troops would relocate to bases outside the cities. Iraqi officials foresee a long-term presence of about 50,000 U.S. troops, down from the current figure of more than 160,000.
In other developments:
Popular on CBSNews.com
- Iran hangs alleged U.S., Israeli spies
- Photos of the Week 21 Photos
- S. Korea: N. Korea launches short-range missiles
- Plane catches fire landing in Moscow
- Assad: Syria transition talks are internal matter
- Plane catches fire on Moscow runway Play Video
- U.K. police announce new leads in missing girl case
- Drone technology myths, facts and future feats
Posted by jowand at 06:02 AM : Nov 27, 2007
There is a tax advantage for/to foreign oil and it is cheaper to produce overseas.
Take a drive in the Oklahoma/Texas/Kansas country side sometime when oil prices are up there - like now - you will see the pumps operating - when the price drops - the pumps are turned off !!
RonPaul2008.com
-- No more meddling in other country''s political affairs
-- No more aggressive military actions overseas
-- No more torture prisons
-- No more pseudo-wars like the "War on Drugs"
-- No more IRS and unconstitutional income taxes
-- No more Federal Reserve (the group of private banks which owns our government)
-- No more erosion of Social Security to pay for militarization
-- No more U.N. (one world government) participation
-- No more NAFTA, CAFTA, WTO or GATT (globalist trade cartels)
-- No more North American Union (loss of U.S. sovereignty)
-- No more federal gun control laws
-- No more illegal aliens pouring-in over our country''s borders
-- No more illegal aliens allowed to roam freely in our streets
-- No more national ID cards (Real ID Act)
-- No more government invasion of your privacy
-- No more federal Laws which force you to take unwanted injections
-- No more federal Laws which are not authorized by The Constitution
-- No more federal erosion of State sovereignty
-- No more unlimited federal government
"Wars are poor chisels for carving-out peaceful tomorrows."
- Martin Luther King Jr.
"Commerce with all nations. Alliances with none."
- Thomas Jefferson
"Ron Paul doesn''t represent your Father''s school of political thought. He represents your Founding Fathers."
- Me
America is tipping way too far back in her easy chair. Something BIG is about to happen, and I predict this upcoming 2008 Presidential Election will be extremely pivotal. I''m not going to name any candidates. You probably already know who my favorite one is. But let me make my point absolutely clear: If you think times are boring, think again. If you think the future is predictable, think again. My advice to everyone who reads this is to be thoughtful. Trust only that wisdom which is your own. 90% of mainstream media in this country is controlled by fewer than 20 different organizations. Unfortunately, they, like the sold-out political ****** who pretend tp serve us in Washington, were bought and paid for by the military-industrial complex decades ago. Therefore, mainsteam media will paint pictures they want to paint, and people will open their minds to pictures they want to see. So, be skeptical. Be wise. Research issues and talking points on your own, and share what you learn with those you love. The future of your family tree may lay in the balance.
What we need is a President who will show us the way. Not the old way. Not the same way, but a NEW way. Think about this for a minute. What if we pulled all of our troops out of South Korea? They''ve been there for 50+ years. What if we quit worrying about Iran, but instead, realized that its having a nuclear weapon will not mean the end of the world? What if we pulled all of our troops out of the Middle-East, and brought them all home? What if we realistically addressed the National Debt, and paid attention to REALLY DOING SOMETHING about stopping illegal immigration? These are the ideas of Presidential candidate, Ron Paul. He''s a ten term Congressman and a physician who has delivered over 4,000 babies. He''s an intellectual who''s published four books, three of which are devoted entirely to sound economics and one to foreign policy. He was raised on a dairy farm in Pennsylvania as a pious Lutheran, but now he attends a Baptist church. Paul is given to mulling things over morally. Whenever he recollects the helicopter pilots he treated as an Air Force Flight Surgeon (Captain) during the Vietnam War, a war which he now says was "totally unnecessary and illegal," he laments, "They were gung-ho. I''ve often thought about how many of those people never came back." Candidates with the high level of personal integrity and proven track record of adherence to The Constitution, Congressman Paul has always demonstrated only come around once in a lifetime, if we''re lucky.
When I consider the prospect of a War with Iran, I wonder whether or not another major power might be inclined to side with Iran and oppose us. 10% of China''s exports go to Iran and 12% of Germany''s. Also, many countries, including China, are heavily dependent on the 2,836,000 barrels of oil Iran exports everyday. Not a problem. I''m sure those folks won''t mind riding bikes until the war is over. As far as the Iranians are concerned, I''m sure they''re just dying (no pun intended) to be invaded, er, I mean "liberated" by Americans, considering the horrid 70% approval rating of Ahmadinejad and the terrible $8,700 gross domestic product per capita there (8.6% better than China). I''m sure we''ll be welcomed in the streets after we "shock and awe" their all important looking buildings to Jahannum and back. When I compare U.S. military numbers with Iran''s, what I find is truly alarming. The U.S. has 2.37 million soldiers ready for combat. Let''s compare that with little ol'' Iran, which has more soldiers available for combat than any country in the entire world. Actually, Iran has more combat-ready soldiers (11.7 million) than China and Russia combined. Talk about hell! The bottom line is that America can''t even handle Iraq. At one point, we thought we could rush in, smite some nubs with dirks and bubble on back home in time to catch the next season of American Idol, but it didn''t quite work-out that way. Did it? With Iran, reality is going to hurt a lot more.
All of the other presidential candidates want to continue our illegal police action in Iraq indefinitely, and they do not rule out a preemptive (nuclear) first strike against Iran. Conversely, Ron Paul voted against our (undeclared) war in Iraq, which was sold to us with lies. The area is more dangerous now than when we entered it. We destroyed a regime hated by our direct enemies--the jihadists, and created thousands of new recruits for them. The war in Iraq has cost more than 3,500 American lives and almost a trillion dollars. We need a leader in the White House who will ensure this never happens again. Both Jefferson and Washington warned us about entangling ourselves in the affairs of other nations. Today, we have 750 foreign bases and troops in 130 countries. We are spread so thin that we have too few troops defending America. And now, there are new calls for a draft. We can continue to fund and fight no-win police actions around the globe, or we can refocus on securing our borders against illegal aliens who are invading us from the South. No war should ever be fought without a Declaration of War voted upon by the Congress, as required by The Constitution. Under no circumstances should the U.S. again go to war as the result of a resolution that comes from an unelected, foreign body, such as the United Nations. Too often, we give foreign aid and intervene on behalf of governments that are despised. Then, we become despised.
On Veteran''s Day, Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul today addressed a crowd of over 5,000 enthusiastic veterans and supporters in Philadelphia. The Veteran''s Day weekend rally took place at Independence Mall. Thousands of veterans and their friends and families heard country music superstar Rockie Lynne open the event for the Texas congressman. John Holland, the founder of a leading advocacy organization for troops, veterans, and POW/MIAs, delivered an enthusiastic endorsement of Congressman Paul, before the congressman addressed the crowd. The rally coincided with the launch of the Veterans for Paul Coalition, a group composed entirely of American war veterans. "Dr. Paul''s support among veterans is extremely high," said Paul campaign spokesman Joe Seehusen. "These great patriots who have fought for our country know that only Dr. Paul''s foreign policy of peace and secure borders can guarantee true national security, and they want him fighting for our country''s freedom." Congressman Paul was himself a Captain in the Air Force who served as a flight surgeon during the "totally unnecessary and illegal" Vietnam war. He receives more campaign contributions from former and active military and military affiliates than all of the other 2008 presidential candidates combined.
Ron Paul''s new book, "A Foreign Policy of Freedom: Peace, Commerce, and Honest Friendship," broke into the best-seller''s list recently. Dr. Paul''s collection of speeches on foreign policy is currently hovering around number 93 on the amazon.com top 100-selling books list, and has continued to maintain its number one spot in the Non-Fiction Government and Economic Policy genres. The book is a 30-year compilation of his speeches from the congressional floor, and assorted foreign policy writings on Constitutional Republicanism and Non-Interventionism. "Dr. Paul''s message of peace, prosperity and freedom is a best-seller," said Paul campaign spokesman Jesse Benton. "The numbers don''t lie. Americans want a humble and constitutional foreign policy, which only Ron Paul can deliver in 2008."
"Peace is not the absence of conflict. It is the ability to handle conflict through peaceful means."
- Ronald Reagan
"A professional soldier understands that war means killing people, war means maiming people, war means families left without fathers and mothers. All you have to do is hold your first dying soldier in your arms, and have that terribly futile feeling that his life is flowing out and you can''t do anything about it. Then you understand the horror of war. Any soldier worth his salt should be antiwar."
- Gen. H. Norman Schwarzkopf
How much exactly would it cost to get Rudy Giuliani to holster his overdone 9/11 sanctimony? The government for the tiny Persian Gulf nation of Qatar might have a good idea. Following earlier reports that Giuliani was still getting paid by a consulting firm he created, Giuliani Partners LLC, Mary Jacoby of the Wall Street Journal sheds light on some potentially problematic sources of Giuliani''s private income. Chief among them is Qatar, the U.S. ally that paid Giuliani Partners for "security advice" regarding their petroleum facilities. The article uncovers a "potential political pitfall" for Giuliani''s candidacy and image given Qatar''s spotty record in fighting Al Qaeda, and addresses aspects of the business arrangement that could dog Giuliani during his quest for the presidency. Specifically, the ostensible chief consumer of Giuliani''s security advice in this case would be Qatar''s Internal Security Ministry, currently headed by a known Al Qaeda associate. As reported earlier this year, Qatar Interior Minister Abdullah bin Khalid Al-Thani has long had ties to top Al Qaeda operatives including Osama Bin Laden, and is believed by many U.S. officials to have personally arranged the narrow escape of Al Qaeda big-wig Khalid Sheikh Mohammed from U.S. agents in 1996, thereby ensuring his freedom to mastermind the 9/11 attacks. Giuliani has refused to release specifics of the case, and to-date remains on the firm''s payroll.
Zogby''s Director of Communications Fritz Wenzel said on November 20 that Paul is the strongest of the GOP candidates to run against Clinton. "Among the larger universe of voters," which includes all parties, "yes, Paul would be a much stronger candidate than any of the other three [Romney, Giuliani, Thompson]," Wenzel said. Zogby recently announced that Paul was their winner in a nationwide blind-bio poll which included voters from all parties. "He is anti-war and the majority of Democrats are anti-war, he has some other ideas and policies and stances on issues more attractive to Democrats, particularly conservative Democrats," said Wenzel. "Even among Independents, he is far and away a more attractive candidate," he added. Paul is the only GOP candidate who is not threatening war with Iran, whereas Clinton vowed to keep that option "on the table." Paul also voted against the war in Iraq, which Clinton has supported. Because Democrats outnumber Republicans, none of the other GOP candidates can win against Clinton, because they simply won''t be able to reach across party lines and attract enough Democratic and Independent voters to beat Clinton. Only Paul can do that. "He''s right on schedule," Wenzel said. "He''s making all the right moves, going in the right direction...at a time when other candidates are not moving." Wenzel based his analysis on recent polls that show Paul could win in New Hampshire and that his support nationwide is intensifying.