![]() |
|
Welcome to the TeakDoor.com forums. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. |
| |||||||
| Middle East Issues Topics about Iraq, Afghanistan and issues focusing on Middle East politics or its cultures. |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
| | #761 (permalink) | |
| Elite Member Last Online: Today 01:06 PM Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,388
| Quote:
I believe the original Neocon plan Iraq was to oust Saddam and set up a pseudo democratic puppet government, de-nationalize the oil industry, break from OPEC, and occupy the country indefinitely to ensure control. It doesn't seem to working out as planned though. | |
| | |
| | #763 (permalink) |
| ฝรั่งพูดมาก Last Online: 02-01-2009 06:58 PM Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Nong Khai
Posts: 10,212
| Ahhh the expert TD foreign policy analysts telling us how it all panned out. How refreshing to have such a clear view on the inner workings of the relationship between a fledgling government and a world superpower (I know you simply abhor that term). Thanks for the insightful wisdom and clever analysis. You guys are the greatest. |
| | |
| | #764 (permalink) | |
| Elite Member Last Online: Today 01:06 PM Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,388
| Quote:
Yea, it was all about regime change so the ex-US friend and allie wouldn't attack the world with WMDs and go on killing his own people hey? Now, after 5 years it looks like the US got the regime change that they really didn't want. With the farce of WMDs exposed and a million dead, now the Iraqi government wants the US out. Hardly what I would call a victory. | |
| | |
| | #766 (permalink) | |
| Ich Bin Ein Auslander Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 10,628
| Quote:
| |
| | |
| | #768 (permalink) | ||
| Clingin' on... Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: BKK
Posts: 4,727
| Quote:
| ||
| | |
| | #769 (permalink) | |
| Elite Member Last Online: Today 01:06 PM Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,388
| Quote: Somewhere down the track I hope that we can meet up for a quiet beer (without talking politics). | |
| | |
| | #770 (permalink) |
| ฝรั่งพูดมาก Last Online: 02-01-2009 06:58 PM Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Nong Khai
Posts: 10,212
| Iraq has had a sovereign, democratically elected government in place for more than two years now. If they wanted the US out tomorrow, there is little the US would do but try to negotiate with them, but ultimately, leave. The Iraq government is exploring their newfound powers -- and what better training partner than their liberators. You remember -- the Americans you guys claim installed them in the first place. I don't, and I don't think any of you do either. Last edited by Texpat : 13-07-2008 at 07:35 PM. Reason: due-do |
| | |
| | #771 (permalink) | ||
| Watching the Wheels Last Online: Today 01:12 PM Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: east of Pattaya
Posts: 9,042
| Quote:
Meanwhile, the US is in a tricky position, because it is (understandably) aligning itself with some Sunni factions, even arming them, in the fight against the radical Sunni Al Qaeda, and allied elements. This can't be seen positively by the Shiites. A damn can of worms- but you opened it. Quote:
__________________ To err is human. To blame someone else is politics. | ||
| | |
| | #772 (permalink) |
| ฝรั่งพูดมาก Last Online: 02-01-2009 06:58 PM Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Nong Khai
Posts: 10,212
| By Dean Yates Reuters BAGHDAD - U.S. and Iraqi negotiators have ended efforts to reach a formal security pact before President George W. Bush leaves office in favor of an interim deal, the Washington Post said on Sunday, citing senior U.S. officials. The two sides had been negotiating a Status of Forces Agreement that would provide a legal basis for U.S. troops to remain when a U.N. mandate expires at the end of the year. But in the past week Iraqi leaders have spoken of only agreeing what they call a memorandum of understanding. Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has also raised for the first time the prospect of setting a timetable for U.S. troops to leave Iraq. The Washington Post quoted one U.S. official close to the negotiations as saying "we are talking about dates", even though Bush has previously rebuffed calls for a timetable. Iraq is a major issue in November's presidential election battle between Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama. McCain supports the Bush administration's current strategy, while Obama has called for a timetable for withdrawal. The Post said the "bridge" security document would be limited in both time and scope and would allow basic U.S. military operations to continue once the U.N. mandate ended. Iraq has rejected a number of Washington's demands, insisting they infringe on the country's sovereignty. The document now under discussion with Iraq was likely to cover only 2009, the Post said. Negotiators expected it to include a "time horizon", with specific goals for a U.S. troop withdrawal from Baghdad and other cities and installations, it added. The fixed dates are likely to include caveats referring to the ability of Iraqi forces to take over security. Some Iraqi officials themselves have said any timetable would be determined by security conditions on the ground. PRESSURE There is strong domestic pressure in Iraq to set dates for a withdrawal of U.S. forces, especially with violence at a four-year low and with Iraqi security forces getting larger and taking the lead in more security operations. Maliki's political opponents would also likely try to exploit the issue of an undefined U.S. troop presence in provincial elections later this year. The most contentious unresolved issue was the legal immunity of U.S. troops in Iraq, the Post reported. U.S. officials have said this is non-negotiable. But Iraq's deputy parliament speaker has said lawmakers would probably veto any deal that gave U.S. soldiers immunity from Iraqi law. The Bush administration has always opposed setting any withdrawal timetable, saying to do so would allow militant groups to lie low and wait until U.S. troops in Iraq have left. U.S. troop levels are already being cut, with the last of five additional combat brigades Bush deployed last year expected to pull out this month. That will leave 15 combat brigades in Iraq, or around 140,000 soldiers. Washington was considering withdrawing additional troops beginning in September, The New York Times reported on Sunday, citing administration and military officials. The withdrawal stemmed partly from the need for more U.S. troops in Afghanistan to fight the rising insurgency by the Taliban and other fighters. No final decisions had been made, but up to three combat brigades in Iraq could be withdrawn, or slated for withdrawal, by the end of the administration in January, the Times said. The White House declined to discuss the withdrawals, but spokesman Gordon Johndroe told the newspaper that while Bush hoped to bring more troops home, he would await recommendations in September from General David Petraeus, the U.S. commander in Iraq, the Times said. http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTKM00295920080713?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNew s&rpc=22&sp=true *** It makes sense to have a MOU in favor of a full SOFA anyway. I'm not aware of any nations that have a SOFA with the US that don't have permanent bases. Japan and Korea and UK and Germany do. Thailand does not. The Philippines does not. Iraq does not. I doubt if Australia does. The US has already announced there will be no permanent basing in Iraq. SOFAs are more precise than MOUs, but they cover the same scenarios. A SOFA is usually a very long-term proposition with a country that shares a defense treaty. I'm not aware of any treaties the US shares with Iraq. Leaving this alone until after the US election is probably a good idea anyway. |
| | |
| | #773 (permalink) |
| Not again! Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Out there!
Posts: 8,121
| Whatever the figure is the U.S of A had and has no right to be there simple as fuck now if you wanna Yank it up then go ahead but that would only explain that you are an ignorant moron which we already know.
__________________ "The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do." Samuel P. Huntington To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. |
| | |
| | #776 (permalink) |
| Elite Member Last Online: Today 01:06 PM Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,388
| Arrrr.. all warm and fuzzy. So Nice of the US to drop in and set things straight in Iraq. I guess that's just what the US does in far away places. Freedom , democracy and the American way.There you go guys. Now we are off home after we have helped you along the way. If only fairy tales were true. The thing is that the UN mandate for the US to continue the occupation of Iraq ends this year, so there are 2 options on the table for USA. 1. find some excuse to ignore the UN mandate and continue occupying the country illegally. 2, pull up stumps and get the fuck out of Iraq as the democratic government of Iraq wants them to do. Alternatively, the US could start a war with Iran and justify the occupation of Iraq as in the American interest. That seems to be on the cards, but wouldn't be real smart IMHO. So, they will probably do it anyway. |
| | |
| | #777 (permalink) | |
| Not again! Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Out there!
Posts: 8,121
| Quote:
Reasons for attacking Iraq was on the suspicion of Iraq having WMDs and being able to attack but where are the WMDs?? Now they twist the story by saying that it was America's moral responsibility to liberate the Iraqi people from Saddam's rule...... now Saddam's gone so why don't they just fuck off?? If "Liberation from Oppression" is the American slogan why not attack North Korea? Kim Jong Il is well known for getting his jollies by killing people. why not do that??? IMO it is a far more noble thing to do. | |
| | |
| | #778 (permalink) |
| ฝรั่งพูดมาก Last Online: 02-01-2009 06:58 PM Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Nong Khai
Posts: 10,212
| British soldiers accused of sickening sex assault on Iraqi boy, 14 By Andrew Johnson The Independent 13 July 2008 British soldiers forced a boy of 14 to carry out an act of oral sex on a fellow male prisoner in Iraq, according to shocking new allegations made about the behaviour of British troops. The Ministry of Defence confirmed yesterday that the Royal Military Police (RMP) have launched an investigation. If the allegations are proved, it would mark a sordid low in the behaviour of British troops in Iraq, and damage further the reputation of Britain in the Middle East. The victim, now 19, whom The Independent on Sunday has agreed to identify only as Hassan, says he was rounded up with a friend while trying to steal milk cartons from a food distribution centre. He was whipped, beaten and forced to strip naked. "They made us sit on each other's laps," he said. "They were enjoying humiliating and abusing us, I wished I was dead at this moment. Then they made me sit with Tariq... where I was forced to put Tariq's penis in my mouth. The other two were made to do the same." Court action is ongoing o |