Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Final Text of Iraq Pact Reveals a US Debacle
WASHINGTON - The final draft of the U.S.-Iraq Status of Forces agreement on the U.S. military presence represents an even more crushing defeat for the policy of the George W. Bush administration than previously thought, the final text reveals.
A US soldier on a rooftop during a sandstorm in Baghdad's Sadr City in April 2008. The White House on Tuesday said it was not surprised by difficulties in nailing down a security pact with Iraq, even as the war-torn country's cabinet called for changes to the planned agreement.
(AFP/USAF-HO/Sgt Adrian Cadiz) The final draft, dated Oct. 13, not only imposes unambiguous deadlines for withdrawal of U.S. combat troops by 2011 but makes it extremely unlikely that a U.S. non-combat presence will be allowed to remain in Iraq for training and support purposes beyond the 2011 deadline for withdrawal of all U.S. combat forces.
Furthermore, Shiite opposition to the pact as a violation of Iraqi sovereignty makes the prospects for passage of even this agreement by the Iraqi parliament doubtful. Pro-government Shiite parties, the top Shiite clerical body in the country, and a powerful movement led by nationalist cleric Moqtada al-Sadr that recently mobilized hundreds of thousands of demonstrators in protest against the pact, are all calling for its defeat.
At an Iraqi cabinet meeting Tuesday, ministers raised objections to the final draft, and a government spokesman said that the agreement would not submit it to the parliament in its current form. But Secretary of Defense Robert Gates told three news agencies Tuesday that the door was "pretty far closed" on further negotiations.
In the absence of an agreement approved by the Iraqi parliament, U.S. troops in Iraq will probably be confined to their bases once the United Nations mandate expires Dec. 31.
The clearest sign of the dramatically reduced U.S. negotiating power in the final draft is the willingness of the United States to give up extraterritorial jurisdiction over U.S. contractors and their employees and over U.S. troops in the case of "major and intentional crimes" that occur outside bases and while off duty. The United States has never allowed a foreign country to have jurisdiction over its troops in any previous status of forces agreement.
But even that concession is not enough to satisfy anti-occupation sentiments across all Shiite political parties. Sunni politicians hold less decisive views on the pact, and Kurds are supportive.
Bush administration policymakers did not imagine when the negotiations began formally last March that its bargaining position on the issue of the U.S. military presence could have turned out to be so weak in relation with its own "client" regime in Baghdad.
They were confident of being able to legitimize a U.S. presence in Iraq for decades after the fighting had ended, just as they did in South Korea. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates had declared in June 2007 that U.S. troops would be in Iraq "for a protracted period of time".
The secret U.S. draft handed to Iraqi officials Mar. 7 put no limit on either the number of U.S. troops in Iraq or the duration of their presence or their activities. It would have authorized U.S. forces to "conduct military operations in Iraq and to detain certain individuals when necessary for imperative reasons of security", according to an Apr. 8 article in The Guardian quoting from a leaked copy of the draft.
When Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki demanded a timetable for complete U.S. withdrawal in early July, the White House insisted that it would not accept such a timetable and that any decision on withdrawal "will be conditions based". It was even hoping to avoid a requirement for complete withdrawal in the agreement, as reflected in false claims to media Jul. 17 that Bush and Maliki had agreed on the objective of "further reduction of U.S. combat forces from Iraq" rather than complete withdrawal.
By early August, however, Bush had already reduced its negotiating aims. The U.S. draft dated Aug. 6, which was translated and posted on the internet by Iraqi activist Raed Jarrar, demanded the inclusion of either "targeted times" or "time targets" to refer to the dates for withdrawal of U.S. forces from all cities, town and villages and for complete combat troop withdrawal from Iraq, suggesting that they were not deadlines.
When Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice visited Baghdad Aug. 21, the United States accepted for the first time a firm date of 2011 for complete withdrawal, giving up the demand for ambiguous such terms. However, the Aug. 6 draft included a provision that the U.S. could ask Iraq to "extend" the date for complete withdrawal of combat troops, based on mutual review of "progress" in achieving the withdrawal.
Because it had not yet been removed from the text, U.S. officials continued to claim to reporters that the date was "conditions-based", as Karen DeYoung reported in the Washington Post Aug. 22.
The administration also continued to hope for approval of a residual force. U.S. officials told DeYoung the deal would leave "tens of thousands of U.S. troops inside Iraq in supporting roles...for an unspecified time". That hope was based on a paragraph of the Aug. 6 draft providing that the Iraqi government could request such a force, with the joint committee for operations and coordination determining the "tasks and level of the troops..."
But the Oct. 13 final draft, a translation of which was posted by Raed Jarrar on his website Oct. 20, reveals that the Bush administration has been forced to give up its aims of softening the deadline for withdrawal and of a residual non-combat force in the country. Unlike the Aug. 6 draft, the final text treats any extension of that date as a modification of the agreement, which could be done only "in accordance to constitutional procedures in both countries".
That is an obvious reference to approval by the Iraqi parliament.
Given the present level of opposition to the agreement within the Shiite community, that provision offers scant hope of a residual U.S. non-combat force in Iraq after 2011.
Another signal of Iraqi intentions is a provision of the final draft limiting the duration of the agreement to three years -- a date coinciding with the deadline for complete withdrawal from Iraq. The date can be extended only by a decision made by the "constitutional procedures in both countries".
The final draft confirms the language of the Aug. 6 draft requiring that all U.S. military operations be subject to the approval of the Iraqi government and coordinated with Iraqi authorities through a joint U.S.-Iraqi committee.
The negotiating text had already established by Aug. 6 that U.S. troops could not detain anyone in the country without a "warrant issued by the specialized Iraqi authorities in accordance with Iraqi law" and required that the detainees be turned over to Iraqi authorities within 24 hours. The Oct. 13 "final draft" goes even further, requiring that any detention by the United States, apart from its own personnel, must be "based on an Iraqi decision".
The collapse of the Bush administration's ambitious plan for a long-term U.S. presence in Iraq highlights the degree of unreality that has prevailed among top U.S. officials in both Washington and Baghdad on Iraqi politics. They continued to see the Maliki regime as a client which would cooperate with U.S. aims even after it was clear that Maliki's agenda was sharply at odds with that of the United States.
They also refused to take seriously the opposition to such a presence even among the Shiite clerics who had tolerated it in order to obtain Shiite control over state power.
Gareth Porter is an investigative historian and journalist specialising in U.S. national security policy. The paperback edition of his latest book, "Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam", was published in 2006.
- Posted in
56 Comments so far
Show AllGo Iraqis! Show the Bush administration what elected representatives of the people are all about.
I agree with Zach. Bush and Cheney have always "misunderestimated" the intelligence of the Iraqi people. His horrible human rights record aside, Saddam knew how to run things and he had the human resources to do it.
In spite of Saddam's oppression, the Iraqi Shiite community developed some very capable and moderate leaders who have emerged and will continue to emerge.
I think that this event will come to be seen as the first in a series of foreign-policy disasters that will help mark the end of this administration as much as its looting of the economy via Wall Street greed.
Someone please help the Iraqi women and girls.
q
"In the absence of an agreement approved by the Iraqi parliament, U.S. troops in Iraq will probably be confined to their bases once the United Nations mandate expires Dec. 31."
Whay are they allowed to remain in their bases? Shouldn't they go too?
This article has entriely too much of a pro-US bias. Under this agreement, the US will still have full control and use of Iraqi airspace. Nothing can fly without US authorization, presumably US aircraft can bomb and strafe with impunity.
When the news comes that the Iraqi Parliament rejects it, it will be time for a little celbration.
"Whay are they allowed to remain in their bases? Shouldn't they go too?"
I read an article once sometime last year that said we've moved so much shit into Iraq, it would take a whole year just to move all the equipment out (and that's assuming all our forces were focusing solely on moving out).
It would seem to me that all U.S. forces will have to leave Iraq by December 31. That will probably mean leaving some equipment behind.
By some equipment, you mean a few divisions' worth of tanks and other vehicles, helicopters, etc? Great thing to leave in a nation friendly with Iran.
Too bad. Blowback. What did you think was going to happen? Shouldn't our smart president have though about this possibility?
Good point, and like he can fucking think of anything. However, I am completely NOT for Iran getting its hands on the most advanced military tech in the world. However much I admire Iran for its history, culture, and people, I don't trust religious governments.
It will be a great moment in the Downfall of Western Imperialism when the Iraqi people who have wanted the US to go home for years can just say no Like Nancy. Happy New Year
People are ready to run their own lives and they are sick of seeing George Bush ruin their lives with his neo fascist warfare on Moslem countries still emerging from Western Imperialism.....
And now the system is Falling Falling and people on this planet are talking to each other and sharing facts and ideas with keyboards tappin and Iraq has figured it out!
They are gettin ready for a happy new Year!
It is beyond hubris to observe Bush continue to spout the relevancy of his beliefs in the face of continued failure and the bankruptcy of our financial system. He's one sick chimp.
The need right now is for all elements of the resistance to convince the Iraqi Assembly to hold off for a better timeline for withdrawal. Three years more of U.S. military presence within the construct of their ownership of Iraqi oil and other resources, will only lead to the next, new stage of violence. If they can hold off until after the December 31st deadline Obama will be able to implement a quicker withdrawal. Even though Obama's plan is not a true exit strategy for a successful transition to a democratic Iraq( please check my blog: sevenpointman for a comprehensive plan), it removes our troops much more quickly and avoids putting them in harms way for three more years.
If they refuse to sign this document, of course they will be forced to do so and they would have to defend their choice.
In this case Obama could use some flexiblity and convince the public of the wisdom of his withdrawal plan and those activists for true democratic socialism could begin to test Obama's street cred and aid the Iraqi's fervent desire to get the U.S. off their backs.
This pact memorializes the utter waste and stupidity of this entire misadventure. For far too long, Republicans had called their opposition "dreamers" (among other worse things), while implicitly stating that they were the party of realpolitik. The Iraq debacle orchestrated by Dubya, Cheney, & Co. has finally put that myth to rest. Sadly, it is at the cost of the unfortunate soldiers who had to serve there, and the Iraqi people who had to endure their presence (the contractors / mercenaries are excepted from the sympathy train).
That this had to be a $10 Billion & counting lesson is even more galling.
"That this had to be a $10 Billion & counting lesson is even more galling."
More like a trillion dollars. A thousand billion. A million million. Taxpayer money, going into the pockets of the war profit pigs, Cheney and Bush included.
There you have it folks! The surge has worked! Now after a trillion dollars, 4200 Americans killed, our military and financial status in tatters, the Iraqis are kicking us out as anybody with at least two or three brain cells knew they eventually would. What a great success this president and his lackey congress has been for America! What patriots! What winners! HooYah!
lwhunt330 October 23rd, 2008 1:43 pm
"There you have it folks! The surge has worked! Now after a trillion dollars, 4200 Americans killed, our military and financial status in tatters, the Iraqis are kicking us out as anybody with at least two or three brain cells knew they eventually would."
Not only that but Iraq will end up as a Shiite theocracy just as I and others predicted, aligned with Iran and unfriendly to the U.S.
Lobo Gris
The document is incomplete without reparations and repatriation assistance for 5 million Iraqi refugees.
But I could be wrong !
What saddens me even more is that people still believe that "they hate our freedoms" crap. Bin Laden clearly stated several times that unless the U.S. ends its unconditional support of Israel and the Palestinians live in security, the attacks won't stop. Many people believe that we should continue supporting a petty "alliance" even though it puts millions of American's lives at stake. People call you a "terrorist" for trying to listen to terrorist demands, even though doing so would save millions of lives. We call them monsters for killing thousands of American civilians, yet we kill tens of thousands more Iraqi civilians and we're the good guys? I'm going to sound "Un-American" here but the fact is these people are acting logically by killing our brave young American soldiers. Also, I'm not saying that terrorists are right in killing innocent Americans but they have a good reason to do so. The whole western world has been against these people. We have taken their homes away and ignored their cries for help. We have been feeding Israel which has been killing these people for years, and we think they're just gonna smile and walk away? Unless We reassess our foreign policy, the attacks will never stop, regardless of how many people we kill. Israelis want peace, American jews want peace, palestinians want peace, but the U.S. doesn't. Instead of trying to solve the problem, we continue to fuel it
For over four years of the US military occupation, the Shiite party coalition behind the Maliki regime was detested by a substantial majority of the Iraqi grassroots for its unwillingness to demand a timetable to end the American troop presence. The Sunni insurgency attacked Maliki's government as a puppet of Iran, collaborating with the foreign infidels. Moktada's Shiite faction simultaneously attacked Maliki's government for collaborating with the American occupation forces, and having a corrupt, hidden agenda to turn Iraq's oil reserves over to western petroleum companies, even if it meant dismembering the nation into Kurdistan, Shiastan, and Sunnistan to achieve that end.
So what has happened? How did it come to pass that in the latter half of 2008, the Maliki government has begun to insist that the Bush administration agree to a public time deadline for complete US troop withdrawal?
The answer to this question seems to point back to the same basic factor that led up to the significant drop in violence inside Iraq in 2007, causing this shift by Maliki: the Shiite death squads and party militias successfully completed a major sectarian cleansing of their Sunni rivals, killing them off, displacing them internally, or else driving them into exile outside of Iraq. That brutal phase of the Iraqi civil war completed, and Shiite majority control of the central Iraqi government secured, it is now safe to turn on the American occupation presence from a position of political strength.
Iran, of course, is poised to emerge from all this as the big winner, and the mullahs have covered their bets wisely. Moktada and his nationalist Shiite Mahdi Army faction are warming up in the bullpen, having been given safe sanctuary by Teheran in exchange for their withdrawal from further hostilities inside Iraq while the surge was surging - an ace in the hole just in case Mr. Maliki might be secretly harboring thoughts of cutting a deal later on that would ask the American infidels to stay.
What is amazing is that this identical configuration of events on the ground in the Middle East is uniformly ballyhooed by the US mainstream media, the Bush White House, and the McCain/Palin campaign as proof positive of the "success of the surge", bringing "victory" within America's grasp if we only stay the course.
How truly delusional. How truly bizarre.
Bill from Saginaw
Yet another in the litany of Bush failures that will guarantee his winning not only America's but also the World's Worst President Ever award. Can anyone think of any nation's president who came anywhere near Dubya's ineptitude?
I was gonna say Saddam, but, naaah. They both killed enough innocent Iraqis, but at least one did it conditionally.
I would say Mao. Good guerrilla leader, shitty head of state.
Who's afraid of the United States? Apparently, no one.
Americans have been told to 'piss-orf' so often now you'd think they'd get the message by now. But do they?
Perhaps when they have their next CIVIL WAR things might change. Next civil war?
It's a possibility you know. Read all about it!
www.dangeroucreation.com
DavidG. October 23rd, 2008 4:29 pm
You misspelled the URL.
It is:
http://www.dangerouscreation.com/
Hey, PFutrell, thanks for noticing my typo. I type it so often that I don't check it often enough.
Cheers.
It would appear that Iran is in charge. Iran has managed to both reduce the violence and set the Americans up for failure. Iranians (Persians) invented chess........They seem to still be bright enough to outwit a fool like Bush...............lizard
&YYY&
A great opportunity to claim victory, a chance to leave with honour.
The Iraqi people have stood up, or at least the ones with some power.
The Vampire States should stand down, as promised to the world,
But like all of the Bush promises, not worth even a stinking turd.
Any agreement signed, any pact forsworn with the States Vampires,
Will soon be burnt to ashes in histories frequent fires.
Just like the United States constitution of common sense,
A Neo Vampire can make solemn documents into total irrelevance.
And when, and not if, the wretched warmonger Vampire grunts slink away.
The Iraqi peoples will for once celebrate with flowers a victory day.
And as power alignments change, throw all reminders of US stay,
Into the trash bin of history, throwing the last piece of Bush Shit away.
HERE HERE!!
Cameiros
Five years and millions dead.
Children.
Women.
Mothers.
Daughters.
Elders.
A country shattered.
But not just any country; the country where civilization arose.
And the wonderful, caring, American people give not a shit.
All eyes are on our pocketbooks.
Always and forever.
*Hollow words for a country that glorifies violence and wealth above all else.
The war has been a success...for some. The Carlyle Group, the Bush family's holding company now controls 8 billion dollars in assets. The stock given to Cheney by Halliburton is staggering in it's grossness. To arrive at a conclusion helpful to the rest of us would have been to (after killing him), making a deal with the then in-control Sunnis, who knew how to run a country. But then the Exxon mobils,British Petroleum wouldn't have made all those zillions, would they?
Foul money darkly earned brings both immediate and long term hardship and tragedy to those who stole it.
Hopefully Moqtada al-Sadr can rouse up enough opposition to quash this “agreement”. I would bet money that he could do a better job persuading his country's legislature to listen them than we can get ours to listen to us.
“...we've moved so much shit into Iraq, it would take a whole year just to move all the equipment out...”
We broke the country so we should make reparations. Whatever can't be carted out in reasonable time, much less than a year, should be considered as a down payment on those reparations.
Now, what about all those other countries where we have occupation troops – I mean security agreements? How about getting together with the opposition to those hundreds of other bases and get those countries to kick the US out also?
Thats an interesting idea, you should make reparations. You do know you are broke and that the national debt has increased 1.2 trillion just in the past year. I suppose you could borrow it, but the bankers only lend you money to buy their non voting stocks or toxic derivative waste.
Lets see, almost 1 million Iraqis dead, who knows how many injured, not to mention the damage and lost oil revenues when prices were 150 dollars a barrel. A few trillion ought to do it, so fork over your 10,000 dollars. Or perhaps the US can go into the slave trade and export Iraq a couple of million poor WASPS who can not make the payment to serve as Iraqi slaves and sex toys.
"MISSION ACCOMPLISHED" Total chaos in the middle-east!
Impeach Cheny first, move to trial for treason, confiscate his holdings as seed funding for reparations; Impeach Bush second, do the same and move throughout the administration.
Has anybody here seen our old friend Cheney?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
....
He's killed lots of people,
but it seems the bad they just lie dung
I just turned around and he was gone.
He had trouble with his pacemaker--it continued to work! Oh...sorry, that's our trouble.
Does it matter? Just as long as he is gone.
I can tell you where he should go.
Looks like we are being firmly kicked out of Iraq. I just hope we don't have another last helicopter on the embassy roof moment.
Signed: Lawlessone [for more irreverence, see resistence-is-possible.blogspot.com]
I hope we are witnessing the destruction of the Imperial United State of America. We need to demolish the evil military industrial complex, and defeat in Iraq and Afganistan may be the best method to this end.
From the demise of the Imperial we can regain our Constitutional government of free persons and good world citizens.
I can't wait for Bush and Cheney to be gone!!!!!!!!! That will be a day of celebration for a lot of us. What a bad eight years we have had. It's like a bad dream. How anyone can vote to put another Republican in office is beyond me.
If Palin gets in and some how McCain can't be the President, we will be back to square one with her. She doesn't have the smarts to be President or Vice President and after Bush, our country would be shit up a creek again.
I'm glad that they want us gone. It's like having relatives that have out stayed their welcome. It's time for us to leave.
I think we leave our equipment there. They have left equipment after other wars or occupations. It is too much to take out and too costly.
Ask yourself who is holding a gun to Bush's head to sign any agreement at all, especially if he does not like it's terms. It's not like Iraq could kick our troops out. He could just maintain the status quo and let Obama make his own deal on removing the troops. It's not like he is making a deal that commits the troops indefinitely, he is getting nothing in return for an agreement to do what he says he does not to do.
The reason of course is we want out because our troops will be needed elsewhere to handle the test Biden said "they" will give Obama when he takes over. This also gives us the cover of Iraq not allowing us to stay, so if anything goes wrong it's Iraqs fault. Once we leave, you can believe the agents we have recruited and trained will finish the job and Iraq will descend into civil war and be broken up into 3 states like Biden recommended. Maybe we will blame Iran and use it to attack them. Bush is just paving the way for Obamas Presidency.
There is no 2 party system, we have one party with 2 colored hats. Republicans play the bad cop wearing red hats, Democrats the good cop wearing blue hats. You will have a new war by 2010 if not earlier. Remember, Biden says Obama is going to be tested somewhere. Pakistan? Russia? Sudan? Venezuela? Iran? China? Any combination or all you can eat?
The UN rsolution that allows coalition forces in Iraq expires on December 31 and then the U.S. cannont stay in Iraq without Iraqi permission.
Bring America Back !!!!
***Wait a minute: King George W.,, Dickie Cheney, and Rummy Dummy promised
America we would be greeted and adored in the streets of Iraq as their
conquering Heros !!!! As Victorious Saviours bringing freedom and democracy !
***It cannot be they are kicking our Rears out of their Nation, instead of
licking the dust from our troops' combat boots, and plying them with caviar
and champagne.
**Are you telling me Iraq is not inviting the USA to occupy their earth for
the 100 Years that John-boy McCain wants to remain on that same soil ???
=====What is going on here ??? We shot over 40,000 laser guided missiles
into that defenseless country; we displaced over 1 million Iraquis from
their homeland forcing them to be evacuees to neighboring nations. We caused
their leader to be hung by the neck. We created one first class torture
chamber at Abu Gharib
*****And now to hear the Iraq parliament, and their elected reps and leaders
insist we Leave their borders==Dont they appreciate a good shock & awe, or
what ???
............Well Gee Whizzers, that's almost like when the Cong kicked our
asses out of Saigon===Were they not Grateful either ???
What do these Nations know, that we Americans do not understand, about our
own United States of America ????????????????
No man can put a chain about the ankle of his fellow man without at last finding the other end fastened about his own neck. -- Frederick Douglas
After the "Bush Country" banner blew down from the silo in Crawford and even the dumbest snuff chawin' rubes were too ashamed to put it back up, Duhhbya to the bitter end went down issuing more signing statements to allow him--in his imperial fairytale mind--to try one last time to gain control of Iraq's oil. The reason Cheney's disappeared so completely off the radar is he's on the floor of the Oval Office dropping tar baby Shrublette hints about jigsaw puzzles to keep him distracted from reality closing in on his McLegacy. Even Saudi sovereign wealth funds are balking at contributions to Duhhbya's presidential library.
The Likud and Kadima neo-con equivalents in Israel are so scared now that the clock is running out on their regional thug-ocracy with Team Bush that they're huddling with the Arab States to form some sort of schizophrenic "peace front" against the rising spectre of a powerful new Shiia alliance between post-Bush Iraq and Iran. Zippy "Pinhead" Livni can't form a "governing" coalition fast enough. Israel will be very lucky to exist for another 10 years.
Amurka would be well quit of the Iraq blood-flail and we can neither afford it, reparations for it, nor a good deal more besides of the annual Pentagon/HSD budget given grim economic realities. 760-plus military bases around the world; mercenary armies outnumbering "coalition of the willing" forces; 50- to 70% privatized intelligence gathering, etc., will all soon to be gone with the fiscal wind. It's empire over whether we like it or not.
But the article tersely mentions "Sunni politicians hold less decisive views on the pact." And, aye, there's the rub to all this pwogwessive exuberance. The tenuous "peace" between Iraq's Shiia and Sunni is being held in place by a combination of U.S. bribes to the Sunni tribal chiefs and the "awakening forces" and the continued presence of U.S. forces. Maliki's Shiia government has no intention of allowing the Sunnis into the national security forces or the local police departments in any areas where they might have even limited authority over Shiia neighborhoods, towns or villages. When the U.S. pulls out there will be absolutely nothing preventing the Shiia majority from carrying out "ethnic cleansing" against Iraq's 5 million Sunnis on a much more horrific scale than what took place in and around Baghdad leading up to the surge (which we stood back and let happen).
The fact that Amurkans, both Right and Left, seem so eager to just wash their hands of all the Iraqi blood that's spilled since Bush Sr. and has yet to come after Bush Jr. disgusts me. We OWE them a regional Marshall Plan centered on rebuilding Iraq and supplying enough employment to the Sunnis and Shiia to keep them too busy for the Sunni rabbit hunt. Even though we can't really afford it. Amurka's priorities need some hard core reshuffling. Amurkans should be compelled into some truly shared sacrifice behind some coherent leadership for a change. We need a unified Progressive Party movement with a moral compass.
Mark my words: Watch what happens when the U.S. bribe money to Iraq's Sunnis runs out...
Iran will make a big mistake if they occupy or try to control Iraq. The Soviet Union couldn't occupy Afghanistan. The US couldn't occupy Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Haiti (how many times?) etc. etc. or Iraq. Romans couldn't occupy Britain. on and on
Successful occupation is not possible.
I suspect that denial and stupidity will prolong and cause more occupations. It sort of levels the playing field, bringing down powerful empires. If we want to lose our empire it would be much cheaper and more peaceful to just give it up than to murder and destroy until we collapse in exhaustion and ruin.
If Iran wants Iraq, let them take it, they will sign their own death warrant.
Thanks, in large part, to a society of arrogant, self satisfied drones this nation and people are a pariah to the world.
And it is justifiably so.
The awe inspiring stupidity/gullibility of the rank and file in this cesspool to be led about by corrupt, rapacious, murderous swine leaves one breathless.
You sat upon your asses crowing about how tough you are while a being with the morals of a Juarez hooker, the academic prowess of a high school football star and the character of a spoiled rich-kid drunk, along with his reprehensible mobsters either allowed or were involved in a tragic attack, lied you and your spawn into a slaughter that has murdered over 2 million human beings, handed over the last vestiges of sovereignty to the nasty little terrorist nation of Israel.
You've sat by and let your "boys" lose their souls to slaughter for a country that has spied, murdered, stolen lied you into a quagmire called the Middle East.
But now, amazingly, you're all set to let the SAME SWINE do it AGAIN!
you completely ignore the rampant lies that have ruined your country and the bulk of you STILL RATTLE YOUR SABERS and are ready to go fight and die AGAIN for the same nasty little terrorist country, same lying little drunk.
The scope of your idiocy and mindless nationalism leaves one breathless....really.
I don't think Iran has any intention of invading or occupying Iraq. What the Persian mullahs want is a cooperative, solidly Shiite-dominated regime in Baghdad that can be manipulated, and that makes sure that Iraqi nationalism will focus upon being anti-American rather than abrasively sectarian or anti-Iranian.
One of the biggest looming worries, of course, is that when US troops are withdrawn and the remaining Iraqi Sunnis see the sectarian cleansing handwriting starkly upon the wall, they will turn to other Sunni states in the region (Saudi Arabia especially) for military and economic assistance in anticipation of the post-surge Iraqi civil war resuming. Everything could implode and turn real ugly for everybody.
The best way to mitigate against this doomsday scenario is for the United States to start work now with all of the Muslim states in the neighborhood, so that during the occupation force withdrawal period there are guarantees of Iraq's territorial integrity when we're gone, a coordinated effort for the safe return of Iraqi refugees, and coherent plans for economic reconstruction.
George W. Bush and the neo-con true believers in the Pax Americana project will never undertake such an initiative, and it is unlikely they would get much cooperation if they could ideologically bring themselves to try. Barack Obama will try.
Bill from Saginaw