if true-there be hell to pay

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,515
211
63
Bowling Green Ky
http://www.nypost.com/seven/0915200...tried_to_stall_gis_iraq_withdrawal_129150.htm

OBAMA TRIED TO STALL GIS' IRAQ WITHDRAWAL

WHILE campaigning in public for a speedy withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence.

According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July.

"He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington," Zebari said in an interview.

Obama insisted that Congress should be involved in negotiations on the status of US troops - and that it was in the interests of both sides not to have an agreement negotiated by the Bush administration in its "state of weakness and political confusion."

"However, as an Iraqi, I prefer to have a security agreement that regulates the activities of foreign troops, rather than keeping the matter open." Zebari says.

Though Obama claims the US presence is "illegal," he suddenly remembered that Americans troops were in Iraq within the legal framework of a UN mandate. His advice was that, rather than reach an accord with the "weakened Bush administration," Iraq should seek an extension of the UN mandate.

While in Iraq, Obama also tried to persuade the US commanders, including Gen. David Petraeus, to suggest a "realistic withdrawal date." They declined.

Obama has made many contradictory statements with regard to Iraq. His latest position is that US combat troops should be out by 2010. Yet his effort to delay an agreement would make that withdrawal deadline impossible to meet.

Supposing he wins, Obama's administration wouldn't be fully operational before February - and naming a new ambassador to Baghdad and forming a new negotiation team might take longer still.

By then, Iraq will be in the throes of its own campaign season. Judging by the past two elections, forming a new coalition government may then take three months. So the Iraqi negotiating team might not be in place until next June.

Then, judging by how long the current talks have taken, restarting the process from scratch would leave the two sides needing at least six months to come up with a draft accord. That puts us at May 2010 for when the draft might be submitted to the Iraqi parliament - which might well need another six months to pass it into law.
 

The Sponge

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 24, 2006
17,263
97
0
http://www.nypost.com/seven/0915200...tried_to_stall_gis_iraq_withdrawal_129150.htm

OBAMA TRIED TO STALL GIS' IRAQ WITHDRAWAL

WHILE campaigning in public for a speedy withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence.

According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July.

"He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington," Zebari said in an interview.

Obama insisted that Congress should be involved in negotiations on the status of US troops - and that it was in the interests of both sides not to have an agreement negotiated by the Bush administration in its "state of weakness and political confusion."

"However, as an Iraqi, I prefer to have a security agreement that regulates the activities of foreign troops, rather than keeping the matter open." Zebari says.

Though Obama claims the US presence is "illegal," he suddenly remembered that Americans troops were in Iraq within the legal framework of a UN mandate. His advice was that, rather than reach an accord with the "weakened Bush administration," Iraq should seek an extension of the UN mandate.

While in Iraq, Obama also tried to persuade the US commanders, including Gen. David Petraeus, to suggest a "realistic withdrawal date." They declined.

Obama has made many contradictory statements with regard to Iraq. His latest position is that US combat troops should be out by 2010. Yet his effort to delay an agreement would make that withdrawal deadline impossible to meet.

Supposing he wins, Obama's administration wouldn't be fully operational before February - and naming a new ambassador to Baghdad and forming a new negotiation team might take longer still.

By then, Iraq will be in the throes of its own campaign season. Judging by the past two elections, forming a new coalition government may then take three months. So the Iraqi negotiating team might not be in place until next June.

Then, judging by how long the current talks have taken, restarting the process from scratch would leave the two sides needing at least six months to come up with a draft accord. That puts us at May 2010 for when the draft might be submitted to the Iraqi parliament - which might well need another six months to pass it into law.

Wonder if back in the day you had a problem with sneaky Reagan's deal with Iran to hold the hostages until he got in office?:shrug:
 
Last edited:

mabus

Registered User
Forum Member
Oct 29, 2007
155
0
0
You mean while he (regan) was running for re-election?
While he was the President?
Not sure how that is comparable...
 
Last edited:

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,587
234
63
"the bunker"
yeah...reagan had a deal with the radical musllim uprising so they could remove jellyfish carter from office and get a hard-line republican like reagan into the presidency......

thats logical.....
 

BobbyBlueChip

Trustee
Forum Member
Dec 27, 2000
20,784
357
83
53
Belly of the Beast
It's more believable like Guiliani said that the leaders of Iran "looked into (Reagan's) eyes and knew that they had to release the hostages."

What a coincidence it is that a 444 day ordeal is settled not 10 minutes after Reagan is sworn in and that "hard-line republican" later agreed to sell arms to a nation as democracy-friendly like Iran.

Christ!
 

The Sponge

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 24, 2006
17,263
97
0
yeah...reagan had a deal with the radical musllim uprising so they could remove jellyfish carter from office and get a hard-line republican like reagan into the presidency......

thats logical.....

Why should i think you would believe this? when it comes to politics you make the Simpson Jury look intelligent
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top