US-IRAQ-timetables

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,514
211
63
Bowling Green Ky
Appears currently GOP-Dem and Iraq timetables prety close--of course this is after surge and war won for most part per conditions on the ground--

Now consider had we went the retreat/defeat path the Dems have been trying to legislate.

Wonder when the 1st will step forward and admit they were wrong--or at least redefine word lost/losing ;)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


Rice says US-Iraq coming together on timetables By MATTHEW LEE and QASSIM ABDUL-ZAHRA, Associated Press Writer
20 minutes ago

BAGHDAD - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said Thursday that U.S. and Iraqi officials agree that timetables should be set for a U.S. troop withdrawal, but conceded that nailing down a broader pact on future relations is difficult.

Appearing together at a news conference, Rice and Zebari also mutually asserted that a final agreement between Washington and Baghdad on a a broad document spelling out the nature of any future U.S. troop presence and Washington-Baghdad relations is close to fruition, but not yet complete.

"We have agreed that some goals, some aspirational timetables for how that might unfold, are well worth having in such an agreement," Rice told reporters after meeting with Iraqi officials, including Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. The two sides had come together on a draft agreement earlier this week and Rice made an unannounced visit to Baghdad to press officials there to complete the accord.

Zebari, asked about fears expressed by neighboring countries over such a pact, said in Arabic: "This decision (agreement) is a sovereign one and Iran and other neighboring countries have the right to ask for clarifications. ... There are clear articles (that) say that Iraq will not be used as a launching pad for any aggressive acts against neighboring countries and we already did clarify this."

A key part of the U.S.-Iraqi draft agreement envisions the withdrawal of American forces from Iraq's cities by next June 30.

Said Zebari: "This agreement determines the principle provisions, requirements, to regulate the temporary presence and the time horizon, the mission of the U.S. forces."

U.S. military forces went into in Iraq in early 2003 and overthrew President Saddam Hussein and the war is now in its sixth year. There have been more than 4,100 U.S. deaths there and countless losses among Iraqis. The war looms as a key issue in the campaign in the United States to elect a successor to President Bush, with presumed Republican nominee John McCain accusing Democratic standardbearer-in-waiting Barack Obama of advocating too precipitate a withdrawal of U.S. forces from the country.

On the plane en route here, Rice had told reporters: "The negotiators have taken this very, very far. But there is no reason to believe that there is an agreement yet. There are still issues concerning exactly how our forces operate."

Her comments dampened speculation that agreement might be reached while she is in Baghdad on a several-hour visit, her first to Iraq since March, after U.S. and Iraqi officials said Wednesday that a draft document was done and awaiting approval from political leaders.

Rice displayed similar caution in the news conference with Zebari.

"Obviously, the American forces are here, coalition forces are here at the invitation of the Iraqi government," she said. "What we're trying to do is put together an agreement that protects our people, respects Iraq's sovereignty."

" ... But the goal is to have Iraqi forces responsible for the security of Iraq," Rice added. "That is the goal and that has been the goal from the beginning. " She said the military surge has worked and "we are making progress together in the defeat of Iraq's enemies of all stripes."

"We're not sitting here talking about an agreement to try to get out of a bad situation," Rice said, calling the agreement one that "builds on the success we have had in the last year. This agreement is based on success."

Zebari conceded that officials had hoped to conclude the pact earlier, but said that "it has taken us more time," citing internal political factors.

"Really, we are very, very close to closing this agreement," he said, "and as we said from the beginning, there is no hidden agenda here."

The foreign minister said the pact that U.S. and Iraqi officials are trying to finish will be presented to Iraq's Executive Council for review. "Time is of the essence," he said, "but, really, we are redoubling our efforts to bring this to a successful conclusion."

Followers of anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr criticized Rice's visit and repeated their opposition to the security agreement. Sadr's followers control 30 of the 275 seats in parliament.

Luai Smeisem, the head of the political bureau in Sadr movement, said: "We as the Sadr movement denounce this dubious visit and such timing. We reaffirm our stance of rejecting the long-term agreement. We demand the Iraqi government, and on the highest levels, not to sign this unjust agreement and we demand the withdrawal of the government as soon as possible."

Iraqi and American officials told The Associated Press on Wednesday that negotiators had completed a draft agreement that extends the legal basis for U.S. troops to remain in Iraq beyond the end of this year, while calling for them to move out of Iraqi cities as soon as June 30.

A senior U.S. military official in Washington said the deal is acceptable to the U.S. side, subject to formal approval by President Bush. It also requires approval by Iraqi leaders, and some members of Iraq's Cabinet oppose some provisions.

Also completed is a companion draft document, known as a strategic framework agreement, spelling out in broad terms the political, security and economic relationships between Iraq and the United States, the senior military official said. The official discussed the draft accords on condition that he not be identified by name because the deals have not been publicly announced and are not final.

In addition to spelling out that U.S. troops would move out of Iraqi cities by next summer, the Iraqi government has pushed for a specific date ? most likely the end of 2011 ? by which all U.S. forces would depart the country. In the meantime, the U.S. troops would be positioned on bases in other parts of the country to make them less visible while still being able to assist Iraqi forces as needed.

There are now about 140,000 U.S. troops in Iraq.

U.S. officials have resisted committing firmly to a specific date for a final pullout, insisting that it would be wiser to set a target linked to the attainment of certain agreed-upon goals. These goals would reflect not only security improvements but also progress on the political and economic fronts.

__

Associated Press reporter Robert Reid contributed to this story from Baghdad
 

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
72
Boston
Tough break DTB. Sorry GW. Tough break for you guys. I know how you are against timetables. :0corn
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,514
211
63
Bowling Green Ky
I'm glad to see the retreat/defeat advocates in better humor :)

When I get a few minutes i'll go over conditions on the ground and time tables--

ie one party trying to legislate defeat--the other victory---per their respectible use of timetables.
 

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
72
Boston
I'm glad to see the retreat/defeat advocates in better humor :)

When I get a few minutes i'll go over conditions on the ground and time tables--

ie one party trying to legislate defeat--the other victory---per their respectible use of timetables.

:0corn
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
I didn't read all of this, but I will. Could it be that the Republicans now realize that Americans may not vote for them if they continue to maintain we need to stay in Iraq? Or maybe the timetables magically appeared after the Iraqi government itself has said we need to get out?

Funny, how a plan magically comes together at the right time. Man, these guys sure know their stuff.
 

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
72
Boston
They must be waiting to see what the blogs have to say to explain this. Surprised we haven't heard from the usual Neocon Cheerleaders. Well not really. :142smilie :142smilie They must feel like their prom date with home with somebody else.

It will probably be something like This is a timetable for victory not a timetable for defeat.:142smilie
 

kosar

Centrist
Forum Member
Nov 27, 1999
11,112
55
0
ft myers, fl
I'm glad to see the retreat/defeat advocates in better humor :)

When I get a few minutes i'll go over conditions on the ground and time tables--

ie one party trying to legislate defeat--the other victory---per their respectible use of timetables.

Defeat advocates, huh? :rolleyes:

Man, 'conditions on the ground' must have taken a huge turn for the better in the last 2 weeks, when certain elements were last seen lambasting the dems for calling for a, um, timetable.


Yes, when you get a chance, go over the 'conditions on the ground' for the rest of the class.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,514
211
63
Bowling Green Ky
I didn't read all of this, but I will. Could it be that the Republicans now realize that Americans may not vote for them if they continue to maintain we need to stay in Iraq? Or maybe the timetables magically appeared after the Iraqi government itself has said we need to get out?

Funny, how a plan magically comes together at the right time. Man, these guys sure know their stuff.

I like the idea that things are going so well there now that Iraq's have confidence they are are now up to task--

Granted it took time and changes to get things right--but thankfully everyone did not want to concede defeat.

Little doubt what would have occured with Obama -Pelosi-Reid at the helm with help of their general betray-us bloggers--and who would be doing the :00hour instead of US-our troops-and our allies.
 

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
72
Boston
I like the idea that things are going so well there now that Iraq's have confidence they are are now up to task--

Granted it took time and changes to get things right--but thankfully everyone did not want to concede defeat.

Little doubt what would have occured with Obama -Pelosi-Reid at the helm with help of their general betray-us bloggers--and who would be doing the :00hour instead of US-our troops-and our allies.

Funny, the closer you come to Obama's position, the further away you seem.:142smilie :142smilie
 

Jabberwocky

Registered User
Forum Member
Mar 3, 2006
3,491
29
0
Jacksonville, FL
I like the idea that things are going so well there now that Iraq's have confidence they are are now up to task--

Granted it took time and changes to get things right--but thankfully everyone did not want to concede defeat.

Little doubt what would have occured with Obama -Pelosi-Reid at the helm with help of their general betray-us bloggers--and who would be doing the :00hour instead of US-our troops-and our allies.

wow. The tragic comedy that is DTB.

Sorry to tell you this, but the "war" was over 4+ years ago. The 20,000 troupe "surge" has done a better job of protecting green zones during our occupation. Great. Power and clean water levels are not yet back to pre-invasion levels, but whatever. You honestly believe that is is still a "war" and you honestly believe that we have brought stability to the region that will endure after we leave. Tragic. As for our allies, who are the allies that are joining us in this continued occupation?
 

kosar

Centrist
Forum Member
Nov 27, 1999
11,112
55
0
ft myers, fl
I'm just glad that the withdrawal plan is being put together by the same people that got us into it. There will be no doubt who to blame when inevitably chaos reigns after we're totally out of there.

Wayne, please be honest. What if Harry Reid had called for a timetable today? What would your reaction have been?

Nevermind.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,514
211
63
Bowling Green Ky
If they called for time table today--vs their including O immediate withdrawel--would say much diff story.

Timetable after victory much diff than resulting in retreat/defeat.

However I believe the timetable they are discussing now is withdrawal of troops from some big cities not from Iraq entirely.
As I said long when you asked me what I thought victory would be there--

--was removal of our troops from the dangerous patrols and remaining there in support role to deter Iran ot A-Q from over throw.

I believe that was/is this admin intentions also.
They would withdraw as ground conditions dictate.

Now a question for you--

Can you imagine what middle east would look like now had we retreated before the surge--per O and company?

--might add I use the term victory cautiously--as when you have 2 diverse relgious cults in country there is always chance for chaos at drop of hat.

One point the Dems have had all along I agree with and think the Rebs should take head of--is Iraq to start footing their own bills--and our monetary input be cut drastically.

My biggest fear in our coming election is having one party rule congress and have sitting president.
I didn't like it when GOP had it as it changed them from Contract with America mode to no diff than Dem party.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top