Maliki: Iraq Ready To Stand Up Now; US Can Leave "Anytime It Wants"

Iraqi PM Maliki says that the US can leave now as far as he is concerned:

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said Saturday that the Iraqi army and police are capable of keeping security in the country when American troops leave "any time they want," though he acknowledged the forces need further weapons and training. The embattled prime minister sought to show confidence at a time when congressional pressure is growing for a withdrawal and the Bush administration reported little progress had been made on the most vital of a series of political benchmarks it wants al-Maliki to carry out.

Even better is this from one of Maliki's lieutenants:

[O]ne of his top aides, Hassan al-Suneid, rankled at the assessment, saying the U.S. was treating Iraq like "an experiment in an American laboratory." He sharply criticised the U.S. military, saying it was committing human rights violations, embarassing the Iraqi government with its tactics and cooperating with "gangs of killers" in its campaign against al-Qaida in Iraq.

There seems to be no one but Bush, the GOP and the Neocons who want the US in Iraq. Oh, and Al Qaida.

< Reid on Warner-Lugar | Tiresome Connections >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    I don't think Iraq would mind having (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 10:06:30 AM EST
    the U.S. in Iraq as far as civilians go.  I think it is the uncivilian uncivil Americans in Iraq they want gone NOW.  I care greatly for America's military but it is a military.  It is an army and an army knows very little about Democracy and the personal rights of the individual....nobody in the U.S. military has them themselves so I don't know how they can convey them or share them with others.

    Ummm... (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Edger on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 10:12:05 AM EST
    There seems to be no one but Bush, the GOP and the Neocons who want the US in Iraq. Oh, and Al Qaida.
    There should be one or two commenters in this thread later to add to that list.

    After all, who cares what the Iraqis think? They're sitting on top of the wingnuts oil. </sarcasm>

    Aren't they included under GOP or Neocon? (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Molly Bloom on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 10:15:47 AM EST
    Well (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by Edger on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 10:48:04 AM EST
    Knowing them, I'm not so sure even the GOP or the Neocons really want to be associated with them. ;-)

    Yup, sitting on top of wingnut oil (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 10:34:05 AM EST
    and making that final military solution not an option because nuking Iraq to glass would probably molecularly evaporate all the oil under it.  Sorry ppj.

    It wuold still be there (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by GuyTheGuy on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 10:51:03 AM EST
    No, the oil would still be there but the radio activity wouldmake it impossible for anyone to go to get it.

    I love Talkleft (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 11:28:14 AM EST
    cuz smart people hang here :)  Thank you for the info.  While being a smartmouth I also forgot about that radio activity stuff.

    Tracy ??;-) (none / 0) (#37)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 15, 2007 at 09:24:35 PM EST
    Sorry ppj.


    Why should I be sorry about you demonstrating your complete lack of knowledge?

    You go girl!!


    Aside from ppj'j constant personal attacks (none / 0) (#40)
    by Sailor on Sun Jul 15, 2007 at 09:48:24 PM EST
    The point is that Iraqis want us out. And bush said when iraqis wanted us to leave we would.

    Of course bush also said he'd listen to the troops on the ground and then fired all the generals that said we should leave.

    Of course bush also said saddam had WMDs and was an imminent danger to the US.

    Anyone else see a connecting thread?


    'wingnuts oil' ... signing away Iraqi democracy (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by dutchfox on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 10:52:25 AM EST
    All the lobbying and PSA's in the world (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 11:32:15 AM EST
    can't change what a $300 IED can do to a $4M Bradley as pointed out by Norm DePlume at DK this morning.

    Problem is (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by Al on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 12:58:17 PM EST
    you can only get the Iraqis to give up their oil against their will if they think you can beat them up if they don't.

    And if they don't think you can beat them up, why then they won't give it to you.

    It's what happens when you approach international commerce with the mind of a five-year-old.


    I don't think the Iraqis (none / 0) (#27)
    by Edger on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 01:52:43 PM EST
    are about to rollover and give up their oil. They'll have something to say about it first.


    Listen to Iraqis engaged in the fight, and you realize they are far from exhausted by the war. Many say this is only the beginning.

    I think they will "honor" those PSA contracts about the same way Bush has "honored" any "commitment" he's ever made.


    edger (none / 0) (#39)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 15, 2007 at 09:28:38 PM EST
    Let's Go! Now! (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by cmpnwtr on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 10:28:09 AM EST
    Okay, the Iraqi people, when polled have consistently by wide margins wanted the occupation over. Now, at long last, we hear it from their government. And even Bill O'Reilly the Faux News maniac says it's over. So, bring 'em home, now!!

    Hat tip to LithiumCola's diary at DK (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 10:32:07 AM EST
    this morning for turning me onto this video.  Please feel free to use this link when questioning all ppj, wile coyote, jarober "rationality".

    The Iraqi woman whose home they invaded (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by Edger on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 11:03:07 AM EST
    struck me. What the videos shows there happens about 30,000 times a day now in Iraq.

    These thousands of patrols regularly turn into thousands of Iraqi deaths because these patrols are not the "walk in the sun" that they appear to be in our mind's eye. Actually, as independent journalist Nir Rosen described vividly and agonizingly in his indispensable book, In the Belly of the Green Bird, they involve a kind of energetic brutality that is only occasionally reported by an embedded American mainstream journalist.

    This brutality is all very logical, once we understand the purpose and process of these patrols. American soldiers and marines are sent into hostile communities where virtually the entire population is supports the insurgency. They often have a list of suspects' addresses; and their job is to interrorgate or arrest or kill the suspect; and search the house for incriminating evidence, particularly arms and ammunition, but also literature, video equipment, and other items that the insurgency depends upon for its political and military activities. When they don't have lists of suspects, they conduct "house-to-house" searches, looking for suspicious behavior, individuals or evidence.

    In this context, any fighting age man is not just a suspect, but a potentially lethal adversary. Our soldiers are told not to take any chances: in many instances, for example, knocking on doors could invite gunshots through the doors. Their instructions are therefore to use the element of surprise whenever the situation appears to be dangerous--to break down doors, shoot at anything suspicious, and throw grenades into rooms or homes where there is any chance of resistance. If they encounter tangible resistance, they can call in artillery and/or air power rather than try to invade a building.
    If they encounter no resistance, these patrols can track down 30 or so suspects, or inspect several dozen homes, in a days work. That is, our 1000 or so patrols can invade 30,000 homes in a single day. But if an IED explodes under their Humvee or a sniper shoots at them from nearby, then their job is transformed into finding, capturing, or killing the perpetrator of the attack. Iraqi insurgents often set off IEDs and invite these firefights, in order to stall the patrols prevent the soldiers from forcibly entering 30 or so homes, violently accosting their residents, and perhaps beating, arresting, or simply humiliating the residents.


    That poor woman, she reminded me (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 11:36:35 AM EST
    of my grandmothers and she had German Shepherds too.  Since I raise them and I watched hers try to soothe her and protect her it is very easy for me to understand what she was going through.  So much for living her Golden Years huh?

    Isn't she suppose to be happy (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Edger on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 12:12:55 PM EST
    that George Bush has "liberated" her?

    I am also struck (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Al on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 01:14:16 PM EST
    by the futility of it all, and that the soldiers are themselves painfully aware of this too. Obviously the campaign is lost when you don't even have your own troops on side.

    Interestingly, the soldiers are very vocal about their resentment against Congress. Not Bush, not Cheney. Congress.


    Talking bad about the President (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 01:22:09 PM EST
    is against military law and will land you in the brig.  Believe me, they have even more unkind and unflattering things to say about Bush and Cheney when nobody has a camera on or some kind of recording device.

    Ah, that explains it. (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Al on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 01:45:53 PM EST
    I was really surprised about that.

    Tracy (none / 0) (#38)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 15, 2007 at 09:26:32 PM EST
    And you think anyone with a moniker of "lithium" can be taken seriously??

    yet another personal attack (none / 0) (#41)
    by Sailor on Sun Jul 15, 2007 at 09:58:26 PM EST
    but trust wrongwingers to attack the messenger when they have no defense to the message.

    Never forget (5.00 / 3) (#10)
    by scarshapedstar on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 10:53:00 AM EST
    George Bush and his followers hate the troops. They deliberately hung them out to try while dangling six-figure Blackwater contracts in their faces, just so they can have their own "off the books" corporate Waffen-SS to maim and kill and terrorize whoever they want and smirk about "no controlling legal authority."

    Jeremy Scahill Video Testomony To Congress (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by Edger on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 11:19:26 AM EST
    Because the Iraqi population does not make the distinction between American soldiers and these private contractors, the questionable activities of these contractors are blamed on US troops, further fanning the flames of outrage and vengeance.

    Some of the most disturbing parts of Scahill's testimony describe a U.S. force in Iraq that is effectively double the size that most people are aware of, and a system where national duty is outbid by profits

    Some contractors make in a month what many active-duty soldiers make in a year. Indeed, there are private contractors in Iraq making more money than the Secretary of Defense and more than the commanding generals.
    Making The Surge A Joke: Doubling The Number Of US Forces In Iraq

    My husband wrote home to me about the (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 11:40:51 AM EST
    contractors six months into the first year we were there and how they are Americans and dress in combat clothing and for all practical purposes are just more Americans to every single Iraqi out there.  He was angry as hell because he said that the atrocities that the contractors did put regular soldier's lives in even more danger every day.  We did not weep for the contractors in Fallujah.  My husband was only a few weeks home when it happened and while we watched the television coverage all he could say was he was surprised that it hadn't happened sooner.

    Plus ... (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by chemoelectric on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 11:01:54 AM EST
    Plus also the heads of Saudi Arabia want it, likely enough, given the situation Bush-Cheney have already created.

    (I don't mean the chopped off heads. I mean the bosses.)

    Flexing Their Muscles (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Edger on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 01:02:22 PM EST
    When Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah opened the Arab Summit in Riyadh [...] speaking about Iraq as a land where "blood flows between brothers in the shadow of an illegitimate foreign occupation and hateful sectarianism," he offended many policymakers in Washington. But the statement was only one signal among many that, in the face of explosive conflicts that the Bush administration has caused or failed to contain, the king is out to assert Saudi Arabia's role as an independent leader in the region. The goals--to stabilize Iraq, build an Arab-Israeli peace and contain the growing influence of Iran--are the same as Washington's. But the means to those ends are very different. In an exclusive interview, Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal sat down with NEWSWEEK's Christopher Dickey to trace the dramatic changes in his country's policy over the last year.

    Since Bandar Bush's demotion (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 01:25:11 PM EST
    Things just haven't been the same in Saudi Arabia for Bush's policy makers ;)

    Oh well. (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by Edger on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 01:46:26 PM EST
    What can he do? No one has any faith in him.

    No one's listening to him either.


    Bandar Bush's..... (5.00 / 2) (#28)
    by desertswine on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 03:11:04 PM EST
    home in Aspen is for sale. I understand it's the most expensive "house" in the USA save one (the Hearst-Marion Davies mansion in CA).

    whew, didn't know that (none / 0) (#36)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Jul 15, 2007 at 08:01:47 AM EST
    If the Democrats don't pounce on this... (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by Dadler on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 12:09:56 PM EST
    ...And make it their blaring headline from here on out, then they are, essentially, dead.  This is the biggest political PR bonanza they could hope to get AND THEY BETTER DO SOMETHING WITH IT NOW.  I expect the party, MoveOn, all of them, to start running commercials today with those words clearly spelled out.

    The true believer spin (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by Dadler on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 03:43:39 PM EST
    They must be burning their oil right now trying to figure out how to spin Maliki's invitation to leave.  I can imagine them claiming that Maliki is really saying, "Sure, if you abandon us like liberals and Democrats want, like liberals and Democrats are stampeding you toward, then go ahead, we'll survive.  It'll be harder and worse, but we'll survive."  Frame Maliki as being a victim of liberals here, that his morale is mortally wounded because we haven't been blindly "supporting the troops", of which he is one.

    It'll still be the evil hand of the left choking off the spirit of our allies.

    In other words, it'll be laughable b.s.

    Like George's laughable BS? (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by Edger on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 03:54:47 PM EST
    al-Maliki said Saturday that the Iraqi army and police are capable of keeping security in the country when American troops leave "any time they want,"
    Great, I guess we'll see withdrawal commence. Otherwise, Bush is a liar:

        "[W]e'll keep our commitment" not to withdraw troops from the country until the new government is capable of defending itself.

    Obviously, that time has come. Otherwise, al-Maliki is a liar. And if both Bush and al-Maliki are liars, then my whole world-view is trashed.

    Strannix at OOIBC

    I don't have the stomach right now... (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by Dadler on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 04:13:52 PM EST
    ...to even tune into FOX for a few minutes as hear how Maliki's invite is being framed and ANALyzed.  

    I swear, if I don't see an anti-war commercial about this in the next week, I don't know WTF I'm going to do.  If MoveOn, for example, doesn't see this for what it is, if they don't get it out wide and loud and now, then there's really no hope.

    Maliki has offered all the imagination we need.  He's done it for us.  Just get it out there, everywhere, and hurry up!


    I suspect, as you said (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by Edger on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 05:38:26 PM EST
    They'll be spinning themselves into contortions over this one.

    It's almost funny in a sick sort of way the lengths they'll go to and the internal conflicts they'll inflict on themselves to remain in denial.


    Really? (5.00 / 2) (#34)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 06:46:43 PM EST
    My guess is that Maliki's words will be buried, hidden, occluded and edited. It will not be an issue, and will be treated as an abberation and mistranslation.

    Our allies (al-Qaida in all its various permutations) want us to stay, who is Maliki to tell us otherwise.

    Party on.


    Time for Chertoff (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Edger on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 06:56:23 PM EST
    to have another gut feeling?

    From the press conference that almost wasn't:: (none / 0) (#29)
    by robrecht on Sat Jul 14, 2007 at 03:43:17 PM EST
    "We're going to stay in Iraq to get the job done, so long as the government wants us there."


    Too bad the Iraqi government will be on vacation so as not to endorse this view officially. It occurs to me al-Mailiki would merely prefer to be better armed so that the Shi'ite militias could more effectively fight against the Sunni's rather than have the Americans co-operating with some Sunni's against al-Qaida inspired elements. Nonetheless, his quote should be noteworthy for future discussions of whether we are really wanted there.