Iraqi PM Supports Obama's Withdrawal Plan

Al-Maliki Approves Of Candidate's Timetable For Removing U.S. Troops From Iraq Within 16 Months

(CBS/AP)  In an interview with the German magazine Der Spiegel, Iraq's Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said he supported a plan proposed by Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq within 16 months.

When asked when he thinks U.S. troops should leave Iraq, al-Maliki told the magazine, "As soon as possible, as far as we are concerned."

He added, "U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama is right when he talks about 16 months."

Al-Maliki deferred, however, from offering outright support for Obama's candidacy. "Of course, this is by no means an election endorsement," he said. "Who they choose as their president is the Americans' business."

The prime minister, who has spoken of setting a timetable for U.S. withdrawal - an option that has been anathema to the White House - discounted the Bush adminstration's concerns.

"So far the Americans have had trouble agreeing to a concrete timetable for withdrawal, because they feel it would appear tantamount to an admission of defeat," al-Maliki told Der Spiegel. "But that isn't the case at all. If we come to an agreement, it is not evidence of a defeat, but of a victory, of a severe blow we have inflicted on al Qaeda and the militias."

The Obama campaign's national security adviser said the Illinois Democrat welcomes al-Maliki's support.

In a statement, Susan Rice said al-Maliki's position "presents an important opportunity to transition to Iraqi responsibility."

"Unless al-Maliki reverses course on this reported remark, his statements should be a major boon for Obama," said CBSNews.com senior political editor Vaughn Ververs. "His seeming endorsement of Obama's troop withdrawal timetable - especially when the candidate is on the ground in the Middle East - could undercut one of John McCain's main rationales for his candidacy - that is, winning the war in Iraq and exiting when events on the ground warrent.

"If the Iraqis are pushing the U.S. to leave, it will be hard for McCain to argue we should stay for an indefinate period of time."

The story of al-Maliki's backing of Obama's 16-month withdrawal plan is also embarrassing to the White House, which has curdled at talk of a timetable. But news of the interview was made even more pronounced when a White House staffer accidentally e-mailed a Reuters article about al-Maliki's comments to reporters, thereby giving it even more exposure than the German interview might have generated.

A White House spokesman said, "It was a mistake," claiming it was intended to be part of an internal distribution of news clips.

As to the substance of the prime minister's comments, CBS News White House correspondent Mark Knoller reports that the Bush administration is taking al-Maliki's approval of a timetable (or, perhaps, an "aspirational time horizon") as a sign of success on the part of the U.S. government.

"It is because of the President's bold surge strategy that we've been able to achieve the gains we're seeing today - be it security, economic or political progress (evidenced today by the Sunni bloc coming back into the government)," White House Spokesman Scott Stanzel said.

"It is our shared view that should the recent security gains continue, we will be able to meet our joint aspirational time horizons," Stanzel said.


Petraeus: Al Qaeda May Be Diverting Fighters From Iraq To Pakistan-Afghan Border

Senior leaders of al Qaeda may be diverting fighters from the war in Iraq to the Afghan frontier area, the top American commander in Iraq told The Associated Press on Saturday.

Gen. David Petraeus also said al Qaeda may be reconsidering Iraq as its highest priority war front.

"There is some intelligence that has picked this up," he said in the interview in his office at the U.S. Embassy along the Tigris River. "It's not solid gold intelligence," he added, stressing that the reliability of the information has not been confirmed.

Petraeus said the information was based on human intelligence, meaning informants.

"There are unsubstantiated rumors and reflections that perhaps some foreign fighters originally intended for Iraq may have gone to the FATA," he said, referring to the Federally Administered Tribal Areas of Pakistan, where militants have a secure staging ground for movements into neighboring Afghanistan.

Petraeus said that until now, al Qaeda communications have made clear that Iraq is its highest priority for battle. "That could be under review."


Brown: No Artificial Timetable

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown said Saturday that plans are being made to scale back troops in Iraq, but refused to consider an "artificial timetable" for withdrawing Britain's remaining 4,000 soldiers.

Brown's comments - following meetings with Iraqi leaders - come in advance of next week's scheduled address to British lawmakers on Iraq, when he is expected to give more details on troop reduction plans as insurgent attacks and militia violence drops sharply around Iraq.

No specific troop withdrawal figures have been made public, but a senior British military officer has predicted substantial troop cuts in Iraq next year.

"It is certainly our intention that we reduce troop numbers, but I am not going to give an artificial timetable at the moment," Brown said following talks with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and President Jalal Talabani.

A departure of more British forces will have little bearing on the battlefield. The troops, mostly based outside the southern city of Basra, no longer have a combat role and are involved mostly with training Iraqi security units.

Although Britain maintains the second-largest foreign military force in Iraq, it is dwarfed by the approximately 150,000 U.S. soldiers currently in the country.

[careyhelen-2009]

What moron wouldn''t support a withdraw plan? come sign our withdraw plan petition www.theoandavirus.com

[jbaker314]

Ousting one man and killing over one million???

I find it amazing how the far left gets away with continuously fabicating these outlandish numbers.

In June 2006, the Lancet claimed some 601,027 dead.

At the same time, the Iraqi health ministry claimed some 151,000 deaths.

Last August (2007), Opinion Research Business claimed 1,033,000 deaths.

The numbers seem more like estimates of enemy casualties during the Vietnam War, where an enemy combat death was reported for every "x" shots fired by US troops. Obviously, those numbers were wholly unrealistic and were later proven to be wholly false.

How many have actually died? We don''t know, and the Iraqis don''t know.

How many of those deaths were the result of combat perations against Coalition troops? Again, we don''t know.

Will we or the Iraqis ever be able to provide accurate numbers? Probably not.

Certainly, I grieve over every innocent death.

However, I find that these exagerations serve no useful purpose.

[shazam111]

correction;promclaura;ousting one bad man ...and in the process killing over million people ...amazing what a brilliant way of doing things .....hello,da,where our so called christian values of humanity and not the values of vampires.

[shazam111]

correction;promaclaura;sweetheart lets say its all true that radical islam came to light in tyranny ...there is another way of looking at is that radical islams inception came to light due to open injustice and unfair,unblanced foreign policy by the u.s goverments time and time again and that was to be true even before george bushs rein,and its a real fact,but once again you conveniently ignoring the other facts that hit us at home which is that how did this other phenomenon about the religious neocons and fanatic zionist jews came to light along with radical islam ..where is tyranny and may be we are blinded that tyranny does exist in united states of america and we do not realize it..aslong as we get our candy and comfortable bed and we choose to look the other way and condem the world for the same reasons that we are guilty off....

ousting one bad man ...and in the process killing over million people ...amazing what a brilliant way of do things .....hello,da,where our christian values of humanity and not vampires.

Posted by shazam111
---------------------
Actually, "ousting one bad man" didn''t take that many lives. It was the aftermath! The pursuit of the idiot son/darth cheney/carlyle group oil agenda that took all the lives....

[shazam111]

hadenough43, I would have supported the ousting of Saddam under any President''''s administration. I felt this way before President Bush took office. If President Clinton had stopped the no-fly zone and went into Iraq to oust that evil man I would have applauded him. So making this a war about oil that we haven''''t seen is unrealistic to me. To eddynewhope, Darfur is another region ravaged by jihad, and Somalia is wall to wall extremism. I don''''t know what will happen for those poor people either. The jihad movements in these countries are killing innocent moderates and I don''''t think anything will be done until non-jihadists stand up to these distorters of a religion. My children''''t doctor is a muslim and he is wonderful caring man.

Also, sorry for getting people off the subject, like many of you know it is frustrating to hear opinions from those who don''''t have your perspective.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by ProMacLaura at 03:35 PM : Jul 20, 2008
+ report abuse
ousting one bad man ...and in the process killing over million people ...amazing what a brilliant way of do things .....hello,da,where our christian values of humanity and not vampires.

[shazam111]

promaclaura;sweetheart lets say its all true that radical islam came to light in tyranny ...there is another way of looking at is that radical islams inception came to light due to open injustice and unfair,unblanced foreign policy by the u.s goverments time and time again and that was to be true even before george bushs rein,and its a real fact,but once again you conveniently ignoring the other facts that hit us at home which is that how did this other phenomenon about the religious neocons and fanatic zionist jews came light along with radical islam ..where is tyranny and may be we are blinded that tyranny does exist in united states of america and we do not realize it..aslong as we get our candy and comfortable bed and we choose to look the other way and condem the world for the same reasons that we are guilty off....

hadenough43, I would have supported the ousting of Saddam under any President''''s administration. I felt this way before President Bush took office. If President Clinton had stopped the no-fly zone and went into Iraq to oust that evil man I would have applauded him. So making this a war about oil that we haven''''t seen is unrealistic to me.
Posted by ProMacLaura
--------------------------
Ok, fine. The problem is - we "ousted Saddam" several years ago....WHY ARE WE STILL THERE??

[promaclaura]

hadenough43, I would have supported the ousting of Saddam under any President''s administration. I felt this way before President Bush took office. If President Clinton had stopped the no-fly zone and went into Iraq to oust that evil man I would have applauded him. So making this a war about oil that we haven''t seen is unrealistic to me. To eddynewhope, Darfur is another region ravaged by jihad, and Somalia is wall to wall extremism. I don''t know what will happen for those poor people either. The jihad movements in these countries are killing innocent moderates and I don''t think anything will be done until non-jihadists stand up to these distorters of a religion. My children''t doctor is a muslim and he is wonderful caring man.

Also, sorry for getting people off the subject, like many of you know it is frustrating to hear opinions from those who don''t have your perspective.

[promaclaura]

hadenough43, I would have supported the ousting of Saddam under any President''s administration. I felt this way before President Bush took office. If President Clinton had stopped the no-fly zone and went into Iraq to oust that evil man I would have applauded him. So making this a war about oil that we haven''t seen is unrealistic to me. To eddynewhope, Darfur is another region ravaged by jihad, and Somalia is wall to wall extremism. I don''t know what will happen for those poor people either. The jihad movements in these countries are killing innocent moderates and I don''t think anything will be done until non-jihadists stand up to these distorters of a religion. My children''t doctor is a muslim and he is wonderful caring man.

Also, sorry for getting people off the subject, like many of you know it is frustrating to hear opinions from those who don''t have your perspective.

[hbevis]

Posted by kollmuss at 02:13 PM : Jul 20, 2008

I enjoyed what you wrote very much. It is very good to read what someone from another Country has to say about this mess that we are in. THANKS VERY MUCH..

HENRY BEVIS
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

[hbevis]

I hear you and respect your opinion. I just don''''t believe that it is an "honorable mission" and therein lies the tragedy. We were told that we were going to war to secure Saddam''''s WMDs, to avert the "mushroom cloud" and because Saddam was working with Al Qaida. Those reasons I supported, but those turned out to be false. What I find offensive is that the mission was later revised to "bring freedom" and we have no right to deliver freedom unto others by way of a tank. That is patently un-American. If we are so concerned about other''''s freedom, what about Darfur or Tibet or Zimbabwe? Again, my question is with all due respect. I know you feel as strongly about this issue as I do - we both love our country - we just have different views of how it should be run.

Posted by EddyNewHope at 02:17 PM : Jul 20, 2008

It is great to have someone write something and keep a clear mind while doing so. You have made some very good points.

I cannot sleep in good conscience in my cozy american bed while there are evil dictators in the world that kill their own people

Posted by ProMacLaura
----------------------------
Do you sleep well at night knowing that the current crop of quislings in the executive brance view war as a "for profit" enterprise??
Do you sleep well at night knowing that Cheney twisted, warped, and outright fabricated evidence to justify the "war for a barrel of oil"?
Do you sleep well at night knowing that over 4100 American military were killed, and your country was sold down the river so those goons could "privatize" Iraq''s oil reserves?
Sleep tight.

[eddynewhope]

I don''''t have to agree with you to be on the right side. I am rich and comfortable living in the US and want that for all

Posted by ProMacLaura at 02:07 PM

I hear you and respect your opinion. I just don''t believe that it is an "honorable mission" and therein lies the tragedy. We were told that we were going to war to secure Saddam''s WMDs, to avert the "mushroom cloud" and because Saddam was working with Al Qaida. Those reasons I supported, but those turned out to be false. What I find offensive is that the mission was later revised to "bring freedom" and we have no right to deliver freedom unto others by way of a tank. That is patently un-American. If we are so concerned about other''s freedom, what about Darfur or Tibet or Zimbabwe? Again, my question is with all due respect. I know you feel as strongly about this issue as I do - we both love our country - we just have different views of how it should be run.

[kollmuss]

Answer to MCVet:

Correct, Iraq was %u201Ca LIE%u201D. Or perhaps better put: a very wrong assumption. But just leaving all the bloody mess behind and focus on another bloody mess, Afghanistan, is that clever? You Americans do not deserve that failure-scenario, nor the Iraqi people. You did not start all this! And not the Iraqi people either! Yes, and by the way, how did everything start? Here is one of the main answers: the war in Iraq is very much a consequence of what happened on September 11 in 2001 and all the chaos that followed from it. Where you not confused yourself about the whole situation, when it happened? I can tell you, I was very confused. However, now everything is very clear. The Islamic extremists does not like the way we organize our society, they do not like our values such as freedom and democracy. Instead, they care about the destruction of the American nation, the destruction of the western countries, the destruction of Israel. And they care about the implementation of their hard core Sharia laws.
Once again, I will quote Adolph Hitler (himself):
"The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness..." Sieg Heil, Usama bin Muhammad bin Awad bin Ladin! Or shall I say Allah Akbar?

Andreas Kollmuss
Sweden

[eddynewhope]

Posted by jbaker314 at 02:00

Compared to what they have today? I beg to differ. And if human rights is was our motivation as you are proposing, why don''t we give a lick about Darfur, Tibet, Zimbabwe, etc. Why did we spend so much blood and treasure to "bring freedom" to Iraq an no one else? Do you really believe we went to Iraq to save the Kurds? I don''t either. And frankly, don''t mistake the Shiites for our pals. They are loyal to Iran and hate us as much as they hated Saddam. Look it up.

[promaclaura]

EddyNewHope, if you have lost anyone in Iraq or helping someone maimed I am sorry for that. I relate to some military families where I live who have lost their sons and still support this HONORABLE MISSION. So far our town has lost three servicemen who went to Iraq even after people believed Bush lied. The military is voluntary and many who have gone to Iraq or died believed in this mission. I don''t have to agree with you to be on the right side. I am rich and comfortable living in the US and want that for all

[jbaker314]

EddyNewHope - The Iraqis would rather have Saddam back?!?

Ask the Kurds if they would rather have him back.

Ask the Shiites if they would rather have him back.

Thousands of Kurds were gassed.

Hundreds of thousands of Kurds and Shiites have been found in mass graves scattered across Iraq.

Iraqis of all persuasions were tortured and murdered in ways we can not begin to comprehend.

No, I don''t believe that the Iraqis would care to have Saddam back.

[eddynewhope]

The reality of your lives and ability to speak out would be miserable and non-existant. I find it sickening that you wish that type of existance on other countries because you hate Predident Bush so much!

Posted by ProMacLaura at 01:36 PM

That begs the question, are the lives of Iraqis better now than they were before Bush/Cheney invaded? Why did we invade Iraq? Was it the fear of the "mushroom cloud", or was it the "secret meetings in Prague between Iraq and Al Qaida" as reported by Cheney himself? Or was it to bring freedom to the middle east as it was later revised? Our actions displaced millions of people and killed hundreds of thousands of civilians - not soldiers - civilians. That does not even mention the 4 thousand patriotic Americans who have been killed and tens of thousands forever maimaed or their families who have to take care of them for the rest of their lives. And why did we invade? Are you suggesting it was a genuine attempt to spread democracy? At what cost? You challenge those who disagree with you to go live under Saddam. I challenge you to consider what it would be like to take care of a maimed son or daughter who came home from Iraq with not only the physical injuries, but the mental injuries of war. And why again? To spread freedom? To rid the world of Saddam? So that Iraqi''s would enjoy free speech? No thanks! And I''d bet that Iraqi''s would rather have Saddam than what they have now.

[promaclaura]

The difference between myself and those who would insult my intelligence is I do not hate our President. If I had a magic wand, I would place all the rabid Bush-haters into Iraq under Saddam or maybe under Taliban rule so they could reap the benefits of such wonderul leadership. The reality of your lives and ability to speak out would be miserable and non-existant. I find it sickening that you wish that type of existance on other countries because you hate Predident Bush so much!