U.S. and Iraqi negotiators have abandoned efforts to conclude a comprehensive agreement governing the long-term status of U.S troops in Iraq before the end of the Bush presidency, according to senior U.S. officials, effectively leaving talks over an extended U.S. military presence there to the next administration.
Now they are going to settle for a Memorandum of Understanding or MOU since it’s become clear that Maliki cannot get the Iraqi Parliament to approve any agreement without dates for withdrawal:
Iraqi political leaders "are all telling us the same thing. They need something like this in there. . . . Iraqis want to know that foreign troops are not going to be here forever."
The wording in the WaPo article however makes the exent of that "not...forever" less than clear:
Negotiators expect it to include a "time horizon," with specific goals for U.S. troop withdrawal from Baghdad and other cities and installations such as the former Saddam Hussein palace that now houses the U.S. Embassy.
Will the “withdrawal from Baghdad and other cities” equal withdrawal from Iraq – or a withdrawal to bases - just as the “no permanent bases” means permanent bases “owned” by Iraq and “rented” to an American occupying force?
(Both Badger at Missing Links and Bernard at Moon of Alabama have interesting speculations on the whole timeline issue - here, here and here.)
While some see this new plan as a sign that the GZG has stood up to Bush, the final comment in the WaPo article lays out what is really happening here:
According to U.S. officials, Maliki also hopes that a temporary protocol would circumvent the full parliamentary review and two-thirds vote he has promised for a status-of-forces agreement. "He is trying to figure out, just as we did, how you can set up an agreement between the two and have it be legally binding," one official said, "but not go through the legislative body."
Meanwhile, the press is full of reports that we will pull at least one brigade of US forces out of Iraq – and send more troops to Afghanistan. How welcome this move will be in Afghanistan became more questionable this week as the Afghan government conducted an inquiry into the US bombing of civilians last week.
RAWA has a more detailed account of the air strike:
One of the injured wedding guests brought to the Jalalabad Civil Hospital told Pajhwok Afghan News coalition planes dropped a couple of bombs on the procession on its way back to the grooms residence in Haska Mena district.
A number of people were killed and wounded. Scared survivors ran pell-mell. When dwellers arrived at the scene to shift the injured and collect dead bodies, the US-led forces dropped four more bombs on us, Jamil said while giving an eyewitness account.
Only six of about 40 processionists escaped unscathed in the airstrikes, revealed another man wounded in the second incident of inaccurate coalition bombardment in three days. All but four of the fatalities were women and children, explained Shahikhel, who disclosed the bride and two of her female relatives were among the victims.
The Afghan government investigation has now reported that the actual death toll was 47 – 2 men, the rest women and children (and both the “men” were under the age of 18.)
The nine-man investigation team appointed by the Afghan President, Hamid Karzai, found that only civilians were hit during the airstrike.
Burhanullah Shinwari, the leader of the investigation team and the deputy speaker of Afghanistan's Upper House, said: "We found that 47 civilians, mostly women and children, were killed in the airstrikes and another nine were wounded."
With the United Nations reporting in June that “around 700 Afghan civilians lost their lives in the first half of the year in violence, an increase of around two thirds on the same period last year” and the International Red Cross reporting on Wednesday that “At least 250 Afghan civilians have been killed or wounded in insurgent attacks or military action in the past six days” it's important to remember that at least 64 of those were killed by US air strikes. Afghan media reports that:
AMERICA has moved an aircraft carrier battle group closer to Afghanistan to boost its ability to carry out air-strikes on militants, despite calls from Afghan officials to reduce air-power because of civilian casualties.
The Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier and its support ships were sent from the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman, reducing the time it takes to reach targets in Afghanistan, US defence officials said on Tuesday.
Someday we may realize that bombing the village to save it does not work – but I’m not holding my breath.
PS - a bit of good news: We've gotten word that Zoriah is safely out of Iraq and back in the States.
Video: Afghan children working in brick factory to pay off famly debts – the full report is here.
Login Here
Share This
Spotlight
Hi, Siun~~~~~~
Hello Dearie … welcome aboard.
Hello again Siun and thanks, By the way, folks, please take a look at the film I link to in my post today about birth defects in Fallujah. You all might want to subscribe to journeymanfilms: they’re making some great stuff (catch Kites, about Afghanistan, and a recent film re: Egypt).
(click on my name for link).
Your post makes me sad. I am so disappointed in my country and feel so unable to do anything but be sorry for the rest of the world. And Bush flipping off the world didn’t help my mood. But thanks for keeping us updated. I always appreciate your posts …. even when they make me sad.
Thanks for highlighting that Laura … Journeyman does some great work.
I’m glad to hear that Zoriah is back in the States. I hope someone has his back.
Human Smoke … Nicholson Baker was right.
Once he gets caught up, I hope we’ll have Zoriah here for a live chat - his work is so thoughtful.
I understand that Zoriah gets to keep his credentials–just not post re: Marines. Have you heard otherwise Siun? Is he out of Iraq for good?
“Maliki also hopes that a temporary protocol would circumvent the full parliamentary review and two-thirds vote he has promised for a status-of-forces agreement. “He is trying to figure out, just as we did, how you can set up an agreement between the two and have it be legally binding,” one official said, “but not go through the legislative body.”———Isn’t going to happen without Al-Sistani’s approval; bet against it. The Parliament is pissed off already at not having the power they thought they had.
All of this is so beyond tragic. Pres W is the same man who scoffed when he denied any relief for prisoner Karla Faye Tucker, another tragic case, when she was to be executed. I believe that Gonzo was his partner in the chortle, acc. to reports. The man is sadistic and loves carnage. We are paying a terrible price. We have to find some means to reclaim and redeem ourselves. We are certainly not the moral voice…of course, we have a Pres. who now ridicules the other leaders. I guess he can’t help it: he is cruel and almost stupid. He cheated in 2 elections and lied us into war: lest we forget.
Laura … I’ll let him fill in when he visits but I think it will be very hard for him to get to photograph in Iraq now … and that is so sad since he brings a lot of truth.
Indeed. It was hard to picture how he would be able to feel safe….
Our guests are coming upstairs.
I believe I owe you a coke (or some similar, non-boycotted beverage) ; ) !
Good evening, Siun.
Siun, I hate to say it, but I believe that “withdrawal from Baghdad and other cities” is another way of saying “massing on the border with Iran.”
Let me forgo courtesy to be blunt enough for there to be no possible misunderstanding. For as long as there are Americans in Irak there will be war. Look at a map. All your bases are in our most heavily populated areas. Let me be even more blunt. The only people who want you to stay are the collaborator “government” and they only want you because they know that once you are gone we will do to them what we did to last set of puppets exactly 50 years ago today.
For as long as even one hundredth of one dunum of our land is contaminated by having Americans on it there will be war.
Siun,
thank you for that Afghani Media link re: USS Lincoln
was going a little nutty earlier in the week when I heard Shuster say the same - more important, he said it was the last USS in Persian Gulf
looking at this link verifies that
what the hell ?
Mohammed - please feel free to be blunt here, it is appreciated and helps us learn.
I have thought no different since before the invasion and have said so here many times.
I believe Mohammed speaks the truth … which means to end war will take a radical change in U.S. foreign policy. Basically, it means learning how to be a collaborative player on the world stage instead of assuming we have the right to run the table.
My question is … what can we do to hasten this process from our end. If we follow the money (which is usually the best thing to do), the biggest barrier is the corporate interests that benefit not only from American militarism but from our economic imperialism.
The past 8 years have shown us that the power of the money coming from those corporate interests is more powerful than the voice of the American people. We need to figure out a way to change that … and to start by finding a way to scale back the multibillion dollar corporate influence in our government.
Maliki also hopes that a temporary protocol would circumvent the full parliamentary review and two-thirds vote he has promised for a status-of-forces agreement. “He is trying to figure out, just as we did, how you can set up an agreement between the two and have it be legally binding,” one official said, “but not go through the legislative body.”
Were Maliki and Bush fraternity brothers or something?
Sounds to me like Maliki has a firm grasp of democracy, Bush-style.
I agree with Siun — Please say exactly what is on your mind. We need to hear very clearly what people in Irak feel.
Welcome Mike - it’s great to have you join us along with our Iraq based guests.
I think forums like this are important and I learn from them … but I always have to remind myself that taking part in a conversation like this is not the same as me DOING something — even when I’m not completely sure what to do. This is a wonderful community of (mostly) like-minded people. How do we take what we learn here to those who don’t think/feel the way they do. How do we do it respectfully and powerfully.
If you believe what Mohammed is saying, then please spread the word about Gorillas Guides … and quote him as often as you can.
Absolutely. One thing i hope to work on post election is a law that congress members MUST divest themselves of stock in armaments and other companies that rely on war for profit.
WOW!!! Simple, effective, and spectacularly clear. To say nothing of a shiv in the back of the MIC… Which, alas, is why it won’t pass in my lifetime.
One thing we do each week … or rather Laura usually reminds us … is to ask folks to give donations to Iraq Red Crescent which is a small way we can offer aid to the people who suffer from our actions: Iraq Red Crescent
(sorry to be typing so much!) One of the things the Obama campaign is doing is asking people in the religious community to hold “American Values House Parties” (i’m not sure that’s the exact name). It’s an effort to attract so-called “values voters” to Obama … but it’s also a great opportunity to change the conversation about what faith-based values really are. And that’s about Iraq … and about economic justice. If you are inclined to support Barack Obama, I hope you will consider attending or hosting one of these. More info at http://my.barackobama.com/page.....tin/gGxDvP
These are excellent forums for using our voices so Mohammed’s and others’ voices can be heard.
Imagine the vote, tho. Imagine having to put yourself on one side or the other. It’s worth the fight, no?
Mohammed, thank you for your truth.
I wish the major US parties gave us a Prez candidate who simply, unequivocally, publicly sought immediate US withdrawal from America’s Irak Occupation.
FWIW, I’m ashamed of what America has done to Irak.
excellent idea, Laura.
I have to go put my kids to bed. I’ll check back later. Sorry to blurt and run! Blessings to you all. Mohammed, as always you are in my prayers.
De-privatizing the military would be a good first step. Cancel Blackwater’s contracts, can’t sue the govt, remember, then get the military back to being a self sufficient force, handling its own logistics like it did before. Besides cutting off the corporations’ cash we’d save money in the bargain.
Of course it means withdrawal to bases. If we postulate that the entire rationale for invading Iraq was to install a large field army in the Middle East, to claim veto power over both the oil and local events, then why would the US withdraw? If the US withdraws from Iraq, the advantage of that strategic position is lost. The US is not going to resign such a strategically valuable position without some powerful incentive, like a domestic economic collapse, or simple military encirclement and defeat.
I don’t care what Obama says.
I am sorry I have to leave. Mohammed, Mark thank you for being here tonight. A ll the guides are always in my daily meditations. Peace to all.
Peace to you my brother - family must always come first and they are blessed with a loving father. May God grant them long and peaceful lives.
Mike - thank you for visiting!
Ho Chi Minh fought the French and Americans for 30 years (the 10,000 day war). The Irakis will fight until we leave. Period.
You are correct the days of white empires doing as they wish to other peoples are over.
Oh, it is ABSOLUTELY worth the fight. It’s just that I’m old enough and, alas, cynical enough to believe that I will not see it become law. I’m 62.
One can but hope.
I want to draw attention to a post by Mohammed today at Gorillas Guides:
Scenes from an Iraki Education
These pictures and Mohammed’s words should be sent to every member of congress.
More than the majority of Americans do not want our troops in Iraq. Bush and the complicit congress are to blame for why they are still there. The American people elected the democrats to get us OUT of Iraq. We were all duped.
For as long as even one hundredth of one dunum of our land is contaminated by having Americans on it there will be war.
I agree but Bush will try and buy off whoever he can and try and set you to fighting among yourselves, don’t let that happen.
Now you have a real goal in life. *g*
Actually, as I understand history, the Vietnamese people fought against one colonial power or another hundreds of years.
Yes, They will. What else are they going to do? Nothing positive is going to happen for Iraq until they shake off the shackles of a foreign occupation. Between the Iraqis and the way forward lies an occupying army. Victory or Death. Question to General Giap: “When will you stop fighting the Americans?” Giap:”When they stop coming.”
China, before the French. Your history is good.
Nothing more dangerous than a people with nothing left to lose.
General Giap has many lessons for all of us!
Far as I know the good General is still alive, 96. If he keeps it up he’s gonna beat death’s ass too.
It’s understanding the difference between beating them and killing them. The US cannot “defeat” the Iraqis-it can only kill them.
Only if we stay in Iraq. I would prefer to leave Iraq before the Iraqis learn those lessons and teach us a lesson Bush and his Generals slept through.
Yes, I saw him being interviewed on TV some time back-a year or two-and he had some very ominous words for the future of the American mission in Iraq.
Mohammed … if I may ask an american focused question?
I am certain that the answers for Iraq will come from within Iraq - not from americans or american politicians. At the same time we are rather consumed by our upcoming election and we have a choice of Obama or McCain. While Obama is not where I want him to be on immediate withdrawal, he is for withdrawal from Iraq. McCain is for bombing Iran and staying as long as he can in Iraq (he does not understand that is not his choice to make).
Do you have any sense of which would be a more useful president as we struggle forward?
“The enemy advances, we retreat; the enemy camps, we harass; the enemy tires, we attack; the enemy retreats, we pursue.”
It’s fairly obvious the military has hidden all those textbooks. Vo Nguyen Giap who? If the Irakis can come up with a military strategist like Vo look out.
“his pal Maliki”
Huh?
Al-Maliki is no pal of Bush.
Your phrase makes it seem that you are >>completely unaware
Al-Maliki is from the religio-political party known as al-Dawa.
Al-dawa was formed decades ago at the behest of the Ayatollah Khamenei.
Al-dawa supported Iran during The Iraq-Iran back when Saddam Hussein was our guy in Bagdhad since he was keeping the Iranians in place.
Al-dawa was an opposition group whose objective was to transform a secular Iraq into a pro-Iranian Shiite fundamentalist republic.
Al-Maliki, al-Hakim, et al have had Bush by the balls since 2003, back when Bush helped thrust the reins of power into the hands of men.
They are no pals of the USA?
Would pals kill the USA with a death of a 1000 cuts?
Would pals blood let the US Treasury.
You are so wrong.
Please review the HISTORY of al-Dawa and the SCIRI.
I can imagine.
re: “his pal Maliki”
Part of the following para was chopped off: Your phrase makes it seem that you are completely unaware of who al-Maliki is and what he was doing during the twenty plus years prior to the deposing of Saddam Hussein.
Perhaps Mohammed Ibn Laith would like to chat about Maliki and his relationship to Bush?
Ian upstairs
Am I supposed to believe that an American
emperorpresident who has that bloodsoaked hag as one of his top policy advisers will be any less vicious than the more blatantly vicious republican candidate for thepresidencyelective monarchy?You Americans may have forgotten the Clinton years we have not.
I see no difference between your two imperialist parties. None
I wonder if America attacks Iran whether our army will use the expected Iranian counterattack through their friends in Iraq as an excuse to really take the gloves off?
Bush has been trying to blame all attacks on Americans in Iraq for awhile now. Attacks that kill much larger numbers of Iraqi civilians would be bad for Bush’s PR image, but what if he claimed all the Iraqi civilians were Iranian fifth columnists?
From Bush’s standpoint the PR problem of doing a Real Crack Down in Iraq would be solved.
After all what is one more lie or war crime now to Bush he has to win in order to make things right. He has to gambol one more time even though he’s lost everything already.
Mao, Sun Tze ?
Take your snivelling elsewhere - your government chose their dogs
“his pal Maliki”
No, you are so wrong.
You have it all wrong.
Maliki has been around a lot longer than 2003.
The US is being bled dry by a cunning religious fanatic who was exiled in Syria and Iran during the 20 plus years prior to the deposing of SH.
He’s no pal of Bush or the USA?
Would a pal of Bush not attend Annapolis?
Would a pal of Bush not call for the right for Israel to exist?
Would a pal of Bush not visit Iran and make business and political deals?
Etc., ad naseum ….
See:
Of all the unintended consequences of the US invasion of Iraq, surely the most paradoxical is the way it has boosted Iran’s position in the region. In toppling Saddam, the United States removed from power Iran’s mortal enemy, the leader of a regime with which it had fought a devastating eight-year war that had cost it a half-million lives. The electoral system the Bush administration devised helped bring to power a Shiite majority with long-standing cultural, religious, and economic ties to Iran. The SIIC, the main government party, was founded in Iran and remains so close to Tehran that many Iraqis shun it for having a “Persian taint.” Iran is erecting mosques and power plants in the Shiite south and investing heavily in construction and communications in the Kurdish north. “The only one winning here is Iran,” an Iraqi journalist observed. “And they’re losing zero people.” (NYRB, Volume 55, Number 12 · July 17, 2008; Embedded in Iraq By Michael Massing)
Clinton was smart, Bush is a reckless fool. You can bait fools insult their pride openly.
I have not forgotten … which was a key reason why I supported Obama over Clinton …. but we have very far to go and a lot of work to do.
Sadly only one candidate called for an immediate withdrawal and he was not taken very seriously.
Mao
Clinton enforced the most lethal sanctions regime ever against an unconquered nation.
Precisely.
No that dog is the only one at the dance who will dance with Bush. Bush thought he would have his choice of dance partners in Iraq but his failures in Iraq have let him few options.
Take your snivelling elsewhere - your government chose their dogs
Huh?
Please consider rewording your post.
My government chose whose dogs?
Chalabi was Bush’s `guy in Iraq’.
Everyone knows that.
The US government has NO history of serious co-operation with al-Dawa or the SCIRI, both of which were formed at the behest of the Ayatollah Khamenei.
The SCIRI is probably still financially supported by Iran.
No that dog is the only one at the dance who will dance with Bush.
Dance with Bush?
What are you talking about?
Al-Malki, al-Hakim, et al have had Bush by the balls since 2003.
Sharia law has been implemented in Southern Iraq.
How is that dancing with Bush?
The US is fuct in Iraq.
The US lost Iraq long ago.
Iran is the victor in Iraq.
The only reason the US is there is because of Bush’s ego.
Which means that Bush is so desperate for friends that after the Iran/Iraq war his only dance partner is a Iraq fifth column group that might be the only group less popular in Iraq than Bush is.
I am only a humble Iraki sandnigger thank you mr. foreigner for enlightening me about my country’s history. Please now tell me about your puppet Iyad Allawi, the one who openly boasted that his group had exploded bombs in our capital was he not “your man?”
As to Chalabi who is known throughout the middle east as “Ahmad the thief” his links to Tehran are notorious.
Suin ….
Al-Dawa is the party to which al-Maliki belongs.
Here’s an essay to give you a better idea about al-Dawa….
HELD BY KUWAIT: 17 SHIITES
Special to the New York Times. New York Times. (Late Edition (East Coast)). New York, N.Y.: Sep 20, 1985. pg. A.10
Abstract (Summary)
After the attacks, Kuwaiti authorities arrested and convicted 14 Iraqis and 3 Lebanese for the bombings. Three of those convicted, two Iraqis and one Lebanese, were sentenced to death, with the rest sentenced to different terms of imprisonment. No date has been set for any execution.
On Dec. 12, 1983, bombings took place in several places in Kuwait, including the American and French Embassies, the international airport, a petrochemical plant and an American residential area.
Five people were killed, including a suicide truck-bomber, and 66 others were injured.
After the attacks, Kuwaiti authorities arrested and convicted 14 Iraqis and 3 Lebanese for the bombings. Three of those convicted, two Iraqis and one Lebanese, were sentenced to death, with the rest sentenced to different terms of imprisonment. No date has been set for any execution.
Those convicted were said to belong to the Islamic group Al Dawa, or The Call, a group of Iraqi Shiite exiles backed by Iran.
Since then, Shiite extremists have tried to secure the release of the Kuwaiti prisoners by kidnapping Americans, and, in December 1984, by hijacking a Kuwaiti airliner that ended up in Teheran. Two American officials who were aboard the plane, were killed by the hijackers.
There was also an unsuccessful attempt on the life of the Kuwaiti leader last May. Islamic Holy War, a shadowy Shiite group, has taken responsibility for the reprisal attacks. Like the Al Dawa group, it is believed to be closely affiliated with Iran.
Kuwaiti authorities have been adamant against yielding to the demands for the release of the 17, and they have been supported by the United States.
Al-Malki, al-Hakim, et al have had Bush by the balls since 2003.
Have they back it up with a link
I’m open to persuasion however just who else is willing to dance with Bush in Iraq may I ask?
And so it should be this is a Muslim country.
Homer … perhaps you have not read our ongoing coverage of Iraq but throwing western media quotes at me is not precisely convincing - the words of our Iraqi guest are.
Mohammed - thank you for visiting, and peace be upon you and yours very soon.
We are not wise, some less than others.
Suin ….
More on why Maliki is not Bush’s pal……
NYRB, Volume 54, Number 15 · October 11, 2007. The Victor? By Peter W. Galbraith
[snip]
In short, George W. Bush had from the first facilitated the very event he warned would be a disastrous consequence of a US withdrawal from Iraq: the takeover of a large part of the country by an Iranian-backed militia. And while the President contrasts the promise of democracy in Iraq with the tyranny in Iran, there is now substantially more personal freedom in Iran than in southern Iraq.
Iran’s role in Iraq is pervasive, but also subtle. When Iraq drafted its permanent constitution in 2005, the American ambassador energetically engaged in all parts of the process. But behind the scenes, the Iranian ambassador intervened to block provisions that Tehran did not like. As it happened, both the Americans and the Iranians wanted to strengthen Iraq’s central government. While the Bush administration clung to the mirage of a single Iraqi people, Tehran worked to give its proxies, the pro-Iranian Iraqis it supported—by then established as the government of Iraq—as much power as possible. (Thanks to Kurdish obstinacy, neither the US nor Iran succeeded in its goal, but even now both the US and Iran want to see the central government strengthened.)
Since 2005, Iraq’s Shiite-led government has concluded numerous economic, political, and military agreements with Iran. The most important would link the two countries’ strategic oil reserves by building a pipeline from southern Iraq to Iran, while another commits Iran to providing extensive military assistance to the Iraqi government. According to a senior official in Iraq’s Oil Ministry, smugglers divert at least 150,000 barrels of Iraq’s daily oil exports through Iran, a figure that approaches 10 percent of Iraq’s production. Iran has yet to provide the military support it promised to the Iraqi army. With the US supplying 160,000 troops and hundreds of billions of dollars to support a pro-Iranian Iraqi government, Iran has no reason to invest its own resources.
Of all the unintended consequences of the Iraq war, Iran’s strategic victory is the most far-reaching. In establishing the border between the Ottoman Empire and the Persian Empire in 1639, the Treaty of Qasr-i-Shirin demarcated the boundary between Sunni-ruled lands and Shiite-ruled lands. For eight years of brutal warfare in the 1980s, Iran tried to breach that line but could not. (At the time, the Reagan administration supported Saddam Hussein precisely because it feared the strategic consequences of an Iraq dominated by Iran’s allies.) The 2003 US invasion of Iraq accomplished what Khomeini’s army could not. Today, the Shiite-controlled lands extend to the borders of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. Bahrain, a Persian Gulf kingdom with a Shiite majority and a Sunni monarch, is most affected by these developments; but so is Saudi Arabia’s Eastern Province, which is home to most of the kingdom’s Shiites. (They may even be a majority in the province but this is unknown as Saudi Arabia has not dared to conduct a census.) The US Navy has its most important Persian Gulf base in Bahrain while most of Saudi Arabia’s oil is under the Eastern Province.
And so it should be this is a Muslim country.
Not saying it should not be ….
Homer - you are forgetting, conveniently - there was nothing unintended about it. You premise is shot.
And please address out guest with respect. You do not know the “ground truth.”
Homer - please stop with the lengthy western essay quotes … and note that you begin with the rather absurd misreading of my satirical “pal” when we know that Maliki is a chosen puppet. His relationship to Iran has been discussed here many times … as has our government’s decision to align with SCIRI and Dawa in order to try to maintain control against the will of the Iraqi people who value their national sovereignty and want the invaders to leave.
Homer … perhaps you have not read our ongoing coverage of Iraq but throwing western media quotes at me is not precisely convincing - the words of our Iraqi guest are.
Hi Suin,
I am looking forward to reading more posts from Iraqis.
NB: Just because they are Iraqis does not mean the are experts in Iraqi affairs in the same way not all Americans are experts in US affairs.
Right?
So in what way is al-Maliki a pal of Bush?
Would kindly point to any pro-American legislation that has been passed and enacted since 2003?
Pal?
If he is a pal, why did he not attend Annapolis, why has there been no political reconciliation, why has there been no oil sharing revenue contracts, etc?
It is also certain that American warmongers and militarists will use continuing Iraqi resistance as a reason to demand more and more funding.
First and foremost, Homer, Siun said it facetiously, not meant as a basic premise…! And, please back off before you make an bigger *ss of yourself…!
Civility first, everyone.
Issues are the prey, not each other.
Maliki is a chosen puppet.
If al-Maliki is a puppet of Bush, why is Iran the victor?
Chalabi was the chosen puppet!!
Al-Maliki has ZERO history of co-operation with the US prior to 2003.
He’s a rogue elephant which the M$M has painted as being ineffecual, despite the fact that he’s been able to actualize al-Dawa’s decades old plan to transform Iraq into a pro-Iranian republic.
He did not need to he visited your president and his spokeschimp in the whitehouse.
It is called in Latin “divide et impera” which in your language means “divide and rule” the standard tactic of empires.
Happily there has been rather a lot of reconciliation going on between those groups who you would call the “Sunni” resistance and groups such as the Jaish al-Mahdi and the Virtue militias. No doubt you rejoice as much about this as I do.
Because your dogs know that if they let your country get their hands on our oil that we will do to them what we did to the last puppet government installed by a declining empire greedy for our oil.
50 years ago today we hunted them down and hung them.
How interesting that your grievance is that your country hasn’t successfully stolen our children’s patrimony despite having “surged” no less than 5 times now.
Here is a word for you that you need to learn:
“Honesty”
I’ll read the remainder of the lesson in the morning.
Thank you Mohammed and Mark. Peace be upon you and yours.
Peace to you I enjoyed our conversation.
Actually, they said they were already booked and could not attend. Some puppet!!
Not in the Iraqi Parliament. And as you must know, there’s been a lot of ethnic cleansing.
I find it 100% impossible to think that the Iraqis would ever let the US get a hold of its oil. It is insulting to Iraqis to even hint that the US could take it. It presupposes that the US is invincible, when its obviously not.
My grievance?
You lost me.
Sorry!!
I do not want the US to take the Iraqi oil.
I strongly think that is naive to think that the US actually could.