U.S. Warns Iraq To Accept Security Deal

White House Predicts "Real Consequences" If Iraqis Reject Troop Agreement

(CBS/AP)  The Bush administration on Wednesday warned of "real consequences" for Iraq if it rejects a newly negotiated security pact.

Without a deal, the United States could be forced to end its military operations.

The White House said Iraqi security forces are incapable of keeping the peace without U.S. troops, raising the specter of reversals in recent security and political gains if the proposed security deal is not approved by the time the current legal basis for U.S. military operations expires Dec. 31.

"There will be no legal basis for us to continue operating there without that," White House press secretary Dana Perino said. "And the Iraqis know that. And so, we're confident that they'll be able to recognize this. And if they don't, there will be real consequences, if Americans aren't able to operate there."

At the Pentagon, press secretary Geoff Morrell said the U.S. fallback position is to extend the U.N. Security Council mandate authorizing U.S.-led coalition operations in Iraq, but he emphasized that the Bush administration's preference is to complete a bilateral U.S.-Iraqi agreement.

"Our focus is entirely on trying to get this deal done," Morrell said.

Morrell said Defense Secretary Robert Gates has not had direct contacts with Iraqi officials since Baghdad announced earlier this week that Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki determined that unspecified changes to the draft accord are required. The spokesman said it was not clear what changes the Iraqis are demanding.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the draft agreement "both protects our troops and the Iraqi sovereignty" and would stand as it was negotiated.

"It is a good agreement," Rice told reporters traveling with her Wednesday to Puerto Vallarta, Mexico, where she was to meet her Mexican counterpart, Patricia Espinosa.

Rice would not say whether she opposes the Iraqi Cabinet petition to reopen negotiations.

"I understand the Iraqis themselves recognize they are not ready to operate without the coalition forces yet," Rice said.

At the State Department, spokesman Robert Wood said time was running short.

"It's time for the Iraqis to step up to the plate and take a decision," Wood said. He insisted that the administration had yet to hear anything official from the Iraqi government on its position or its suggestions for possible amendments.

At left: U.S. soldiers of 4th Brigade Combat Team, 10th Mountain Division, and Iraqi police secure a street during a joint patrol in Fadhiliah, eastern Baghdad, Oct. 22, 2008.

The U.S. has 155,000 troops in Iraq. In addition to conducting combat operations against a weakened insurgency and hunting down al Qaeda fighters, the U.S. military is training Iraqi security forces, assisting in the resettlement of displaced persons, coordinating efforts to restore and improve basic services like water and sewage, and providing personal security for senior Iraqi government officials.

The Iraqi government on Wednesday decried what it called the "not welcomed" statements from Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who cautioned the Iraqis of unwelcome consequences in the event that the security pact is not signed by the end of the year.

Mullen, who was traveling in Europe, told reporters on Tuesday that time was running out for the Iraqis to sign the deal and that he was concerned the Iraqis may not fully appreciate the seriousness of the situation.

"These statements are not welcomed in Iraq," Iraqi government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said in a statement. "All Iraqis realize the volume of their responsibilities and they appreciate the importance of signing the pact or not in the way they deem it proper."

Al-Dabbagh added: "A compulsory method must not be imposed on their choice and it is improper to address Iraqis in such manner."

Morrell said the Iraqis should not take Mullen's comments as an attempt to force anything on them.

"That couldn't be further from the truth," Morrell said. "We are not trying to pressure the Iraqis or force the Iraqis into signing anything they don't wish to sign."

In subsequent remarks Wednesday, Mullen said he believes the Iraqis are not ready to provide their own defense, according to a Pentagon account of comments to reporters traveling with him.

Mullen also made clear in those remarks that if there is no U.S.-Iraqi deal and the U.N. mandate runs out on Dec. 31 without being extended by the Security Council, then all U.S. military operations would have to cease. Mullen and other senior U.S. military officials have said repeatedly that the security situation in Iraq is too fragile to justify a full U.S. withdrawal anytime soon.

The proposed security pact calls for all U.S. combat forces to be removed from Iraqi cities by June 2009 and for all forces to leave the country by the end of 2011, unless both sides agree to an extension.

In a satellite video-teleconference from Baghdad, an Army commander told reporters at the Pentagon on Wednesday that his understanding is that by June 2009 U.S. troops would not be based inside cities but would be allowed to operate as trainers and advisers attached to Iraqi military units.

"We will have embedded teams," Col. William Hickman, commander of the 2nd Brigade, 101st Airborne Division, said. "And those teams will remain with Iraqi army and the Iraqi police in execution of our mission. So that is how we're seeing our situation here - to continue to focus on the training of the Iraqi security forces so that they are prepared as we go into spring and summer of next year."

Hickman's brigade operates in western Baghdad.

Morrell announced that on Thursday the Iraqis would regain security responsibilities for Babil province, making it the 12th of Iraq's 18 provinces to be restored to Iraqi control.

[hermitdave]

WHAT is wrong with this puppet government in IRAQ? Don''t they realize that when America does a illegal invasion, they expect to get their way on everything. Iraq might just as well agree that it is no longer their country, change the countries name to BUSHINSTAD and welcome western big oil. If the puppet president is lucky, George will let him use the mens room at BUSH PALACE.

[jerr11]

Didn''t Bush use to say we''ll get out of Iraq if they indicate they didn''t want us there?

Oh I forgot, he''s the Liar-in-Chief.

He gets to tell the lies.

Others obey.

[swingset4u]

"There will be no legal basis for us to continue operating there without that,"

HEELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!! They wanted the US out a long time agooooooooooooo! GOD_DAMN!!!!!!!!!!!!

[swingset4u]

This is NOT a game of GO FISH! You are Phucking with peoples lives here! DO NOT try and blow smoke up the rest of the worlds arse just to save face. NO MORE BUSH REGIMES!!!

[pirmin3]

US warns Iraq??? The US is a laughing stock around the world both militarily and economically. GW, take your medication and leave while you still can.

[lemonskink]

US WARNS IRAQ. Cut me a efffin break people. Bush ordered the invasion and occupation of a sovereign nation that cost America thousands of lives, billions of dollars, wreaked havoc on the domestic economy, and destroyed the Contitutional rights guaranteed. They continue to rattle their drums and it''s all right here:
http://ugv.abcnews.go.com/player.aspx?id=6305372

[moxford0]

Maybe Bush could send Palin and her phoney christian trash to Iraq to straighten things out. Arm them with pea shooters. Everbody loves a winner!

[norcalguy101]

"US WARNS IRAQ. Cut me a efffin break people. Bush ordered the invasion and occupation of a sovereign nation that cost America thousands of lives, billions of dollars, wreaked havoc on the domestic economy, and destroyed the Contitutional rights guaranteed."

Was this poster recently educated at one of our finer public schools or did they just wake up from being in a coma since about 1976? The United States entered into Iraq based upon the best information known at the time that resulted in the Joint Resolution to Use Military Force in Iraq. You know, the bi-partisan act voted on by the House and Senate in October of 2002? Bush then received an increase in the number of Republicans in the House and Senate two weeks later in the November, 2002 midterm elections. The "liberation" of Iraq was justified by the provision within UN Resolution 1441 that Iraq would suffer "dire consequences" should they fail to cooperate with the UN weapons inspections. Iraq/Hussein failed to adhere to the UN weapons inspections and hence suffered the subsequent consequences.

[enlightenu]

Without a deal, the United States could be forced to end its military operations.

"There will be no legal basis for us to continue operating there without that," White House press secretary Dana Perino said.

well, sounds like a done deal to me. Time to pack it up and go home

[FHMullane]

Seems Bush still feels he can threaten and bully even our friends. If we have to be out of the cities by next summer that means a considerable number of our troops should be able to leave. Some have to go to Afganastan but the National Guard should come home and do what they are intended to do and with a hurricane season coming up at that time it would be great timing!!!

Bush is bound and determined to shove us down these people''s throats. 2011 is a good time away... and I don''t blame the Iraqis wanting to have that as a goal. They will never step up without a goal... that is what Obama has been trying to say.

[harbinger09]

"The Bush administration on Wednesday warned of "real consequences" for Iraq if it rejects a newly negotiated security pact."

That sounds like a threat. Definitely not the sort of thing one sovereign nation says to another as they pretend that we are there as guests and that the other country can kick us out any time they want to.

[smurfcrusher]

Hasn''t Bush claimed the forces are doing great, for years? Yet another lie, apparently.

I got a kick out of the following quote,

"
...if the proposed security deal is not approved...,"

"There will be no legal basis for us to continue operating there without that," White House press secretary Dana Perino said.

Since WHEN did we have a legal basis for being there?

Lies about WMD and Al-Qaida does not qualify as a legal basis.

If Iraq doesn''t agree, we can just invade again! Except, without the invasion, since we are already there.

Perhaps we can bribe the government to step down and we can install one that does our bidding with less resistance.

George Bush strikes again...

[brundage3]

Get real...

The United States invaded a sovereign country. No different than if we had BEEN invade by some country which went to the UN, said we have weapons of mass destruction with a history which shows we have invaded countries often in the past. including Mexico on several occasions, Cuba, Cambodia, North Vietnam, and various countries in Africa, asia, Europe and Island nations. So a nation could claim to have (indeed could falsify) intelligence saying we have hostile intentions again. PRESTO,,, we could be invaded.

The only reaso we are the invaders and not the invadee, (thank heaven) is that WE are the mighty when it comes to the military ability to invade.

So,,, Iraq is NOT going to like us. They are not stupid people. The heard the crass remark on film showing a single car hurrying across a bridge just before it was taken out by a bomb when our general said"laughing, "That''s the luckiest Iraqi in the world."

We build schools, speak of freedom, claim to hate the guy who sujugated them, provide some food and build a road AFTER killing scores of thousands of their friends and neighbors and destroying almost completely their infrastructure and then call ourself liberators and think they will love us.

WE are the invaders. They do not like us and they will not like us for a long time.

[andrew_693]

if the iraquis choose not to allow themselves to be pillaged, raped and murdered by the US military there will be consequences alright. Amongst them Bushy and his christians will probably have some of their al quaeda friends destroy the country and go on a murder rampage to destabilize it. The same way they had the american herd I mean people believe that 9-11 was a terrorist job.

[kmkej14]

the legal basis for being in Iraq stems from the post invasion period after Saadam Hussein (pardon spelling).

The dismantling of the fourth largest army in the world has many parallels to the Prussian army of the 19th century.

As far as "real consquences," to attempt to put a value on sentient life would perhaps be a brazen risk at defying the Will of God (however your belief(s) may exist).

[kmkej14]

Vietnam technology was leaps ahead of accuracy in terms of point contact and lethality (setting aside the carpet bombings and Agent Orange)....but now we have poisoned feed for our livestock

[kmkej14]

that is perhaps the importance of democracy to allow the people within a sovereign land to decide their own decisions...so long as they take into consideration past action to get themto that point of freedom

[juwboy]

Demongirl60:

You should also ask yourself why Moslem suicide bombers kill infidels so they can be rewarded with 72 VIRGINS when they get to Paradise.

Surley, 72 hot, h@rny, voluptuous, EXPERIENCED babes would give them a much better time!

[brianbwb-2009]

Let''s see, the choices for Iraq are,

1. accept at least three more years of US occupation, murder, kidnapping, rape, torture, theft of their oil resources, or,

2. wait until the mandate expires on December 31, then with the full Iraqi, US, and international legal authority, order the US out.

Hmm, tough choice...not...

[brianbwb-2009]

"It''s time for the Iraqis to step up to the plate and take a decision," Wood said. He insisted that the administration had yet to hear anything official from the Iraqi government on its position or its suggestions for possible amendments."

Oh? I distinctly remember two years ago hearing Iraq say "the US can leave anytime it wants", and more recently agreeing with the timetable as proposed by Mr. Obama.

"I understand the Iraqis themselves recognize they are not ready to operate without the coalition forces yet," Rice said.

We all know the severe limitations on Rice''s ability to understand anything. It might not be a bad idea for Rice to continue traveling outside the jurisdiction of the US citizen''s arrest squads.

We should hound her for the rest of her treasonous life, educate her on the subject of how to treat genocide propagandists.

[n8yvn29]

Is this the -OUT- that Bush and his neocon cronies have been looking for: to get out of Iraq and save face after having squandered the lives of 4000 plus Americans and over a million Iraqis (not to mention the billions and billions of tax-payer dollars) in a war based upon lies and misrepresentations?

[notfooled]

The Bush/Cheney crime syndicate is trying to ram yet another criminal act down everyone''s throat, as if 911, 2 wars, and 700 billion dollars isn''t enough, they gotta hold an entire country hostage.

A million dead humans is simply not enough - we must stay and murder thousands more.

Since their making roughly a million dollars per exterminated human, it only makes sense to stay and try to hold on to the bloodmoney pot of gold.

When do the trials for war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity start?

[cariboubarbi]

Ever try to take a bone from a dog? Bush can''t let us leave Iraq cause he wants to protect their oil fields for our oil companies on the taxpayer''s dime.

The cost? Ten billion a month. Why don''t these oil companies hire their own private security? Why should they? They own our government.

[samsel3]

The Times of India August 2007 reported : " Iran, Iraq signed an agreement to build pipelines for the transfer of Iraqi crude oil and oil products." Under the deal crude will be refined and sent back to Iraq. Bush opposed this agreement and wanted the Iraqi Parliment to accept and sign a U.S. designed oil law that would result in huge profits for BIG OIL.

Iraqi oil workers and 63% of Iraqis polled are opposed to the Bush law and prefer a hands off Iraq oil policy.

On January 26, 1998 in a letter to the President the PNAC asked Clinton to invade Iraq and get rid of Saddam Hussein.. Clinton refused their request.

[formrusmcsgt]

On one hand:

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the draft agreement "both protects our troops and the Iraqi sovereignty" and would stand as it was negotiated.

And then this:

"We are not trying to pressure the Iraqis or force the Iraqis into signing anything they don''t wish to sign" Morrell said.

Now, which is it?

[tincup356]

caribou barbie , the reason why bush wants to keep giving private security for next year is he would still make a profit off of it through his ties with the Carlyle group, who holds 85 % control of the pentagon budget for private security.the weekend of the bailout congress went behind closed doors and gave him 488 billion more just for next year.even after he leaves office he will make billions off the war Congress on both sides of the isle approved this, and people still cant see our whole government is corrupt.VOTE OUT EVERY SINGLE INCUMBENT IN OFFICE, BOTH PARTIES.

[lastdance128]

The White House said Iraqi security forces are incapable of keeping the peace
____

NAZI Fascist Bush and The NAZI Fascist Bush Crime Regime
Has a Very Bad Memory Problem ! !

It''s NOT About Keeping the Peace
It''s About : WMD''s

It''s NOT About Keeping the Peace
It''s About : "OIL"

It''s NOT About Keeping the Peace
It''s about : NO BID Government Contracts (Halliburton)

It''s NOT About Keeping the Peace
It''s About : Immunity to Blackwater - (Murder of Women and Children

It''s NOT About Keeping the Peace
It''s About : Immunity to Blackwater (Selling US Weapons to Terrorist Organizations)

It''s NOT About Keeping the Peace
It''s About : Granting Immunity to Kellogg, Brown & Root (Kidnapping-Sexual Assault)

[cariboubarbi]

Ever try to take a bone from a dog?

Bush can''t let us leave Iraq cause he wants to protect their oil fields for our oil companies on the taxpayer''s dime.

The cost? Ten billion a month.

Why don''t these oil companies hire their own private security? Why should they? They own our government.

[tincup356]

its ok people , don''t start fretting about all the screw ups, the people are going to vote the same congress back in next month and the monster will only get a new head in the form of the new president elected from the same congress that brought us all the misery we endure now.there are plenty of things congress can do to keep us poor Americans poor, mainly not represent us.Its just your great lobby dollars hard at work, to keep your representative from doing just that, represent you.

[samsel3]

The PNAC s goal has always been world market domination. In concert with Big Oil the Godfather of the PNAC George HW Bush held meetings with the Saudis at Walker Point in Maine prior to the Iraq invasion.

Iraq with the Russians were the Saudis main competition in global Oil markets. 2.5 million barrels a day of Iraqi crude was sold cheap in world markets angering the Saudis and Big Oil. Iraq was one of seven countries on the administrations hit list. Taking out Iraq did take out the competition enabling Big Oil and the Saudis free reign to drive oil prices up.
The Russians are not to blame. Blame the PNAC.......


Paul Wolfowitz,Don Rumsfeld, Scooter Libby, George Bush, Richard Cheney, Eliot Cohen. Zalmay Khalilzad, Steve Forbes, Donald Kagan, Pete Rodman, Henry S Rowen, Dan Quale, William J.Bennett, Jeb Bush, they are all members of the PNAC Project for a New American Century.

[samsel3]

The Times of India August 2007 reported : " Iran, Iraq signed an agreement to build pipelines for the transfer of Iraqi crude oil and oil products." Under the deal crude will be refined and sent back to Iraq. Bush opposed this agreement and wanted the Iraqi Parliment to accept and sign a U.S. designed oil law that would result in huge profits for BIG OIL.

Iraqi oil workers and 63% of Iraqis polled are opposed to the Bush law and prefer a hands off Iraq oil policy.

On January 26, 1998 in a letter to the President the PNAC asked Clinton to invade Iraq and get rid of Saddam Hussein.. Clinton refused their request.

[chris32324]

and if the iraqis dont sign,,whatta ya gunna do,,invade,kill thousands of innocents,inprison thousand of innocents,steal their assests?,,,oh wait,,,already did that,and lost the respect of the entire world.

[lastdance128]

On May 30, 2007
Vice President Cheney''s deputy assistant for national security affairs
Joseph Wood, rushed to Baku, Azerbaijan.

He had a single message : Washington intended to persist with the policy
of opening direct access to Central Asian oil and gas,
Bypassing Iran and Russian territory and Russian pipelines

In late July when Chevron (Condoleezza Rice, was a director of Chevron)
Announced its intention to open an office in Ashgabat and participate in
the development of the New Caspian Sea pipelines.
(In order to capture the central Asian oil market)

VP Cheney and Condoleezza Rice delivered the contracts

Russian Leader Putin and Ahmadinejad ; Both Warned :
The Western Nations shouldn''t pursue oil pipeline projects in the area.
If they weren''t backed by regional powers.

[lastdance128]

Tuesday, 12 April 2005
Iraq''s Baath Party Revival to Follow .... The Bush Model

Note: A copy of the Arabic original of the memo translated below was discovered
during a recent raid on a Baath Party safe house in Bagdad.

Date: 1 April 2005 - From: Committee to Construct the Future
Subject : Path to Absolute Control: The Bush Model

Summary : We propose to reconstruct the Baath Party according to principles
evolved by the Republican Party under the leadership of President George W. Bush.

He%u2019s all democracy all the time in public, but the goal brazenly enunciated by his
chief tactician Carl Rove* is pure Baath: the achievement and perpetuation of an
unchallengeable one party state.

The Republicans are, well on the way to achieving a single party dictatorship crowned
by a President ruling by executive order.

As we Baathists face the challenge of regaining power under a new American-sponsored
constitution, it behooves us to follow the steps, below, which show how the Bush White
House has consolidated its power in Washington

Research : Iraq''s Baath Party Revival to Follow Bush Model
(copy and paste Google)

[lastdance128]

Saddam was a Baath Party Member and Baath Party Leader

The rise of German fascism played a role. Many in the Arab world saw
Hitler as an ally. In 1941,

An Arab nationalist by the name of Rashid Ali al-Kailani organised
an army coup against the pro-British Iraqi monarchy and requested
help from Nazi Germany.

In Damascus, then a Vichy French colony, the Baath Party
founders immediately organised public demonstrations in
support of Rashid Ali.

After the Second World War, the Baathists emerged as the
leadership of Arab nationalism

The new Iraqi strongman was Abdel Karim Qassim.
As a counterweight to the Baath,

Qassim allied with the Iraqi Communist Party
(the strongest in the Middle East).

On 8 February, 1963, the Baath Party staged a bloody coup
against Qassim, killing thousands of communists.

Many believe that the CIA was involved in the coup as a way of
destroying communist influence in the region.

The US CIA __ Exchanged Communism For :
NAZI FASCISTS - The Baath Party
Saddam was a Baath Party Member and Baath Party Leader

[emelder]

Bushed again ... one more mess for Barack to clean up! The next President will have to be intelligent, build world-wide coalitions, and have the stamina to stay with a well-conceived vision for this country ... Barack can do that, McCain cannot. Our choice is clear this time, people. Go Obama/Biden ... let''s get out the vote, make this a mandate for change ... and make it impossible for the Republicans to steal this one in the courts (their lawsuits have already begun over voter registration issues).

[jediservant]

President Bush has to be the dumbest president in history. These people "WANT" us out including the Iraqi government.

Get our soldiers out now!

[lastdance128]

RE : pythoncharly __ Learn how to READ ! !

Baath Party = NAZI FASCIST Ideology
Bush = NAZI FASCIST Ideology
Republican Party = NAZI FASCIST Ideology

pythoncharly __ Must you Continue to make a Fool out of yourself

pythoncharly __ Learn how to READ ! !

[payasyougo]

"U.S. Warns Iraq To Accept Security Deal"
----
Or Mr. Obama will use diplomacy to resolve it.

"Invading Iraq without U.N. support was the wrong thing to do."
Invading Afghanistan [without U.N. support] will be the right thing to do.

20/20 hindsight is easy to market to people that only look backward.

Obama - making the rich pay your fair share.

"There will be no legal basis for us to continue operating there without that," White House press secretary Dana Perino said
----
That isn''t precisely true, Dana. Taking a page from the Clinton Book of Is-Law, the United States is entitled to "do what it does because it can." See case law for Lewinsky inre Clinton. Maliki should really watch the old newsreels to see what happens when the United States militarily abandons a country. I''d suggest those centering on Vietnam and Somalia for starters. Perhaps then, the Iraqis will "...fully appreciate the seriousness of the situation." In the final analysis, it is their country, their government and their future at stake. If they choose to burn it there, it''s their business.

Obama - making the rich pay your fair share.
Posted by payasyougo
---
You''re maybe counting on Joe the Plumber? How''s that working out for you?

[frankie2fing]

WE LOST THIS SO-CALLED WAR, STAYING THERE AND PRETENDING WE ARE POLICE MEN WILL NOT MAKE US INTO WINNERS.
Posted by pythoncharly

Wow, you are way off base. This ''liberation'' was never winnable, this was all about message and payback. Dubya wanted to get Hussien (not Barack Hussien Obama, but the actual BAD GUY) back for the the attempt on his daddys life. You know, the Texass Way: you piiss in my coffee, I will piiss in yours. Never mind that you both are drinking piiss. The message being sent was from cyborg Cheney and Dumbsfield, who in 1992 memoed that peace in the Mid-East was through a series of regional wars, replacing each regime with ''friendly'' regimes in a sort of domino effect. All they needed to have to start the dominos was a ''New Pearl Harbor.'' Problem was, the real enemy was Bin Laden, son of one of dubyas benifactors and friend of daddy. Al Queda won. They won on 9-11 when dubya did not react fast enough, sort of like a deer in headlights, and they won after the fact: dubya invades a soveriegn nation, making the terrorists job easier to recruit new member and dubya takes away our freedoms. And that is the victory that Bin Laden always wanted: To change our lives. It was easy for him, he had a good partner.

[jatchko]

I''m ashamed of my country. We attacked Iraq on a lie. We are no better than the Nazis. I will never believe anything the U.S. tells me. A CIA agent''s life was ruined. My life will never be the same, nor will my friends life whose son is in Iraq right now. I''m 45 life is not better after these 8 years. Life will not get worse; Remember Pakistan has the BOMB and the Number 1 Terrorist. As long as BUSH does buisness with his family Everything is OK in the USA

[olderwiser3]

We won this war several years ago. We forced Saddam from power. We hunted him down. We convinced his own people to try him and then lynch him. That is a pretty thorough victory.
The follow-on attempt to either dictate the Iraqi form of government, get control of their oil, or to establish some sort of ''permanent'' military presence in the Middle East is a failure. There is no prospect of anything like a victory in these goals.
It would be somewhat amusing to have the Iraqi''s refuse to sign an agreement and by their sovernty force W to abandon his own war before the new president takes office.

[tannerbird]

WHO RUNS THE DAM SHOW ANYWAY

[riddelup]

Someone tell me if I am wrong. The U.S. invaded Iraq and defeated their military and deposed the ruthless dictator Saddam.We did not leave Iraq because we believed bad people would take over and the country would revert to it''s prior state. The decision to occupy Iraq was for the good of Iraq and the people of Iraq.Now the people we state are the right people are firmly in charge and are asking us to leave. If we refuse to leave now it is evident we are there for the oil goaded on by an oil infrastructure as well as the very profitable military industry. Behind the scene is the bloated lobby industry growing fat by controlling congress and bending the will of congress to their own.

[runningralph]

There is an intelligent educated class in Iraq. Unfortunately, they are no match for the jihadist thugs. Odds are against Maliki''s government''s survival. Maliki knows this. He is not stupid. He will sign the paper.

[riddelup]

The democratic leaders of Iraq want more money. Yes America, we are paying them billions. They think once we have a regime change the gravy train will halt. Give them a big handful of money and they will sign.

[my0pinion381]

You know what i changed my mind about Obama! I think he will be better for national security and the economy!

Besides I think Sarah Palin is really a Nazi!

Breaking news:
www.chilitoz.com
Thousands of pictures of NAZI SS Officers and Adolf Hitler found property owned by Sarah and Todd Palin. Also an apparent Altar dedicated to the notorious Angel of death Dr. Joseph Mengele along with thousands of NAZi era coins.

[weawaken]

Seems like people have completely forgotten why we went to Iraq. And that those reasons turns out to be false. This is illegal. And American citizens are so dumbed down that they think Sadaam Hussein helped mastermind 9-11 or something. People need to be held accountable for this as it has been a catalyst for our undoing.