Submit your comments on this article |
Iraq-Jordan |
State Dept: U.S. will leave Iraq if asked |
2004-05-14 |
The State Department, as usual, inhabits an alternate reality in which they believe they have a clue and are in charge. U.S. and coalition forces will leave Iraq if asked to do so by an interim Iraqi government, a State Department official told the House Thursday. During occasionally combative questioning by bipartisan members of the International Relations Committee, the Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Marc Grossman said that the United States would respect the wishes of a newly sovereign Iraq even if it meant withdrawing troops before Iraqi general elections are held in 2005. The sovereignty handover is scheduled for June 30. Grossman repeatedly insisted that he did not believe such a request would be made by the new Iraqi body. The notion that coalition forces would take marching orders from Iraqis was challenged by a military representative testifying before the committee. Lt. General Walter L. Sharp of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said that U.S.-led multinational forces were authorized under U.N. resolutions to operate in Iraq at least until a permanent constitutional government was elected. |
Posted by:RWV |
#10 The article link buttons did not work for me the first time round, so here's the link to the article "POW's, the Geneva Conventions and the Second Gulf War" March 2003 http://www.ciss.ca/Comment_GulfWarPOWs.htm I include it for those who are interested in reading what our Geneva Convention obligations are to Iraqi insurgent POW's -not much-except for whatever we think is humane. Torture lite is okay. Neither the USA nor Iraq, for that matter, ratified the 1977 Protocols I and II of the Geneva Conventions. My point to quoting this is that I think the WH could have said we will investigate and punish behavior unbecoming to our internal military code, and not grovel with reparations and mea culpa breats beating. I see it as a bad sign that elected politicians of both parties caved as soon as they heard Arab Street was upset. Too much State Dept. influence on the WH for my liking. |
Posted by: rex 2004-05-14 5:36:34 PM |
#8 I think that LH has hit the nail on the head. The State Department is acting in concert with the Administration not against it. The coalition needs to cease being an occupying force. We will be in the conflict zone at the pleasure of the a sovereign Iraq. Our troops and treasure will once again be ours to give as we choose and theirs to accept and reject as they choose. The new government will certainly understand that our support for it will be based on its policies, but that the US and UK can politically not afford for the new government to fail, utterly. |
Posted by: Super Hose 2004-05-14 3:37:02 PM |
#7 As I have said a few days ago on another thread, I think we should pull ALL our GI's out of Sunni/Shiite Iraq effective July 01 or no later than Dec. 31 that's for sure and instead build a huge military base in Kurdistan. As a gesture of goodwill and to help the Shiites and Sunis with getting their electoral and judicial process up and running, I think we should offer the services of the all the experienced folks at the State Dept. and the ACLU, sans GI body guards of course, so the latter can better "connect" with the famously decent and peaceful hearts and minds of the Iraqis that we are told about 24/7. However, JAF, you have allergies to dust and camel dung, so alas, you can't go to Iraq with your fearless state dept.leadership...you'll need to stay with us stateside and continue taking your Allegra & Flonaise. Michael Savage was brilliant this week, btw. Anyways, yesterday he mused aloud that if the Sunnis' and Shiites' new sovereign government came under the influence of terrorists, big deal, it would present a wonderful opportunity for us to deal with Iraq once and for all, the way military folk are trained to do. We could then declare war on the new nation of Iraq and blast them all to Allah-no more putting our boots on the ground and trying to figure out who is an innocent Iraqi and who is a bad Iraqi. I rather like Savage's idea, and it ties in nicely with my thoughts about moving out to Kurdistan to protect our long standing allies, the Kurds. The Shiites and Sunnis are hopeless. Two days ago,on the Glen Beck show it was reported that after news of the decapitation of Berg came out, 1000 Iraqis took to the streets [in Baghdad? wherever, I can't remember the city]to march in protest over the barbarism of Berg's murder. People...what is wrong with this picture...we "liberated" 24 Million+ Iraqis and they can barely scrape up as many people to march on our behalf as we have had GI's and contractors killed working on their behalf? Let's get our military [and our military dogs] out of this ungrateful Sunni/Shiite hellhole, and position ourselves in Kurdistan and wait...dum, dee, dum, dum...it shouldn't take too long, especially if State Dept. and the ACLU are there to help, like they helped us... |
Posted by: rex 2004-05-14 1:50:05 PM |
#6 JAF - good luck to you. |
Posted by: B 2004-05-14 10:01:23 AM |
#5 I miss the point of the furor. We ARE giving back sovereignty on July 1, arent we? And really what is the likelihood that a govt made up of Pachachi, Talabani, Chalabi, etc would ask us to leave? |
Posted by: Liberalhawk 2004-05-14 10:00:14 AM |
#4 Fire his ass! JAF,I hope you have hip wadders and a well made sh#t shovel. |
Posted by: Anonymous4786 2004-05-14 9:13:15 AM |
#3 I work for the state Dept and there are a lot of leftys here. Im here, so Im taking on the cesspool. |
Posted by: JackAssFestival 2004-05-14 8:01:08 AM |
#2 A cabinet shuffle! Good one. |
Posted by: Rafael 2004-05-14 12:26:21 AM |
#1 Rumsfeld should resign, and Powell should take his place. . . . Then put Rumsfeld in as Secretary of State with a mandate to clean out that cesspool. |
Posted by: OldSpook 2004-05-14 12:19:54 AM |