Posts Tagged ‘Iraq’

Well, it’s official: according the MSNBC, all US forces will be out of Iraq by the time 2012 rolls around.

(from the BBC)

Under the deal, US troops will withdraw from the streets of Iraqi towns next year, leaving Iraq by the end of 2011.

The decision will need to go before Iraq’s parliament for a final vote.

America’s National Security Council welcomed the cabinet’s vote, saying it was “an important and positive step” towards stability and security.

The pact is necessary to determine the role of US military forces in Iraq after their UN mandate expires on 31 December 2008.

In October, Iraq sent a new round of suggested changes to the draft Status of Forces Agreement (Sofa), to which the US responded.

Washington had previously said the pact was “final” and could not be amended.

The UK government, which has 4,100 troops in Iraq, is waiting for the US-Iraqi pact to be approved so they can use it as a template for their own bi-lateral deal.

Well, we had to take out our troops sometime, and 2012 seems reasonable, though I’d prefer that we pulled them out earlier. Still, I think this gives the Iraqi government more than enough time to clean up its act and prepare its troops to actually defend against terrorism.

At the same time, I’m not so sure I like this, considering that we have been using Iraq as a launching pad for attacks against Syria, in addition to using our bases in Afghanistan to conduct strikes in Pakistan. Keeping troops in Iraq for any longer amount of time means that it’s possible that we can conduct cross-border strikes into Syria again, and possibly Iran.

There’s no question that we need our troops out, but it looks like Iraq is an eternal damned-if-we-do, damned-if-we-don’t situation. The truth is, we really don’t know what kind of hell we’ll unleash once all of our troops leave the country, and we won’t know for sure until January 1st, 2012.


Share It

Share this post using del.icio.us del.icio.us  Share this post using Digg Digg  Share this post using Facebook Facebook  Share this post using Google Google 
Share this post using Live Spaces Live Spaces  Share this post using MySpace MySpace  Share this post using Newsvine Newsvine  Share this post using Reddit Reddit 
Share this post using StumbleUpon StumbleUpon  Share this post using Technorati Technorati  Share this post using Twitter Twitter  Share this post using Yahoo! My Web Yahoo! My Web 

Advertisements

Original Article

Apparently, according to Bob Woodward, the US Big Brother has turned its Thought Police away from the American people, and to keep them occupied, had them spy on senior officials of the Iraqi government instead. Of course, with Iraqi officials hearing about what was in the book, they are itching to ask Bush and Co. whether they really were getting spied on by America. That’s nonsense, as we all know! Saying that America would spy on Iraqi government officials is like saying they’d spy on their own people!

Oh, wait…

But, hey, at least this guy Woodward doesn’t have a history of uncovering anything notable — he’s just another stupid journalist with zero credibility.

Oh…

Said the article:

Iraq is to ask US officials for an explanation after a new book suggested the United States had been spying on senior members of the Iraqi government.

The claims are made by US journalist Bob Woodward in The War Within: A Secret White House History, 2006-2008.

“If it is true… it reflects that there is no trust,” Iraqi government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said.

Woodward’s book quotes a US source as saying the US knows “everything” said by Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki.

“If it is true it casts a shadow on the future relations with such institutions,” a statement from Mr al-Dabbagh added, referring to the Central Intelligence Agency and other US agencies.

Okay, so our government just surveils the officials, no big deal, right? Nothing about the surge working…

The book also claims that the US “surge” in 2007, in which nearly 30,000 extra troops were sent to Iraq, was not the primary reason for the steep drop in violence seen over the last year.

Mr Woodward says new covert techniques have been used successfully by US military and intelligence officials to find, target and kill insurgents.

He does not go into detail about them, saying the White House asked him to withhold specifics in the interests of national security.

The book quotes from interviews given by Mr Bush himself, and looks at the how the decision-making of the war evolved and the internal clashes it caused.

Oh. So the surge wasn’t the real reason that we’ve won in Iraq? Amazing!

After 4 parts detailing how we got in this conflict and how we’re going to stay in it, no matter what happens, there is still some hope. Yes, we’re going to have to “combat” terrorism, but there are some steps you can take to ensure that, somewhere down the line, your voice is heard. Getting heard by the government is the best thing to do in this situation, but they don’t respond well to individuals.

What’s lost in all this shuffle is why the terrorists hate us so. Al Qaeda in Iraq wasn’t there when we invaded, so why are they there now, and why are other people blowing themselves up in an effort to kill Americans?

Because the people there are just like you and me and everybody else. When the terrorists hit the WTC, this nation wanted to avenge their lost friends and family who died that dya. The terrorists are no different. When we invaded Iraq, we invariably killed people’s loved ones who were in the Iraqi army or were just civilians. Like us, they needed to get revenge on the people who did it, and luckily for them, the Americans were occupying their country. So, for every terrorist (or civilian) we kill, his son or his uncle or his brother or his father or his friend take up the reigns and try to avenge their loved one that the “evil” Americans killed. They figure that if we hadn’t invaded, their friend or family member would be alive, just like our friends and family who were killed on 9/11 would be alive had it not been for the hijackers. And that’s very true.

The best thing you can do is spread awareness about our government’s lies about the War on Terror, meaning, of course, to spread the word about these posts using social bookmarking. Tell your friends, family, coworkers, etc. By the same token, get involved in your community and tell people about our situation; tell your local government about how the war on terror should be fought with law enforcement, not armies.

That’s the message I’m going for here: this is not a war that can be fought with our armed forces. It’s a war that should be fought with the folks in our law enforcement agencies. If you, above all, spread that message, everything should take care of itself. The more people you inform of our situation, the better chance there is of our government hearing our voices.

So, write to your congressman and tell him (or her) that our war on terror needs to be fought by the police, not the armed forces. Tell them that our war is just putting our brave men and women in harm’s way and putting the civilians in the countries we occupy in harm’s way as well. Tell them that our actions aren’t saving lives; they’re ruining them, whether they’re American lives or Iraqi lives or Afghani lives or Filipino lives. Our troops in other countries put not only their lives at risk, but those civilians who had no choice in the matter (of occupation by the U.S.) at risk too. For a nation so proud of its democracy, America doesn’t listen to the voices of the folks who live in countries that we’re fighting this “War on Terror” in. Stick up for them and be heard.

add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: Digg it :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! :: add to simpy :: seed the vine :: :: :: TailRank :: post to facebook