Iraqis: Deal close on plan for US troops to leave

Wellp, there goes McCain's stance.

Nah, I'm sure McCain will just accuse the Iraqis of flip-flopping.

Both sides stress the deal is not final and could fall apart over the issue of legal immunity for American troops.

I don't see why the troops don't deserve immunity. Those who have in fact committed an offense can still be punished by our military. However, the contractors are a completely different story.

I don't see why the troops don't deserve immunity.

In any other armed conflict have soldiers received immunity?

This from USA Today, a similar article but with more info on immunity:

The official said the Iraqis were willing to grant immunity for actions committed on American bases and during combat operations — but not a blanket exemption from Iraqi law.

Speaking as a veteran who served overseas, that sounds no different to me than any agreement we would have with Germany or say South Korea. In fact, having served in South Korea I knew of fellow soldiers held by the Koreans for crimes committed off base. Yes, the Army always tried to negotiate jurisdiction, but they didn't always win.

This from an explanation of standard status of forces agreements:

but the typical provision in U.S. SOFAs is that U.S. courts will have jurisdiction over crimes committed either by a servicemember against another servicemember or by a servicemember as part of his or her military duty, but the host nation retains jurisdiction over other crimes.

Sounds to me like the Iraqi's are pursuing a standard SOFA.

#1.3 -- I'm not saying that they don't deserve it. I just thought it was odd that they were pushing for it, since I had never heard of it being pushed for before. Thanks to Independent Ed for the explanation, though.

yeah how can there be a "deal" and that "things may fall apart" if they are a sovereign country.

You know my neighbor heard a noise and called me thinking there was a burgler, I come over with my gun and wait until they feel better.. well when he asks me to leave, I dont make a deal. I get the heck out the mans house.
I hope our emasculated media can grow the tiniest of gonads and dare ask the administration to clarify this a bit.

I love how when any good news comes out of Iraq showing progress you all knock it...whats the deal?

And of course we want immunity....jeez!

No country in their right mind would ever surrender their soldiers and military people to the laws of another country.

You guys just cant stand anything coming out of there.

What if Iraq works out well after all the mishanding? Will you still hold on to your grudges?

What good news? That Iraq wants us out and the Administration is fighting to keep us there anyway?

Frame it however you'd like. The fact is we are there and we are not going to risk having to go back.

You really believe we WANT to be there now? We would like nothing more to be done with them and move on to Afghanistan.

But we must be as careful getting out as we were careless getting in.

And of course we want immunity....jeez!

No country in their right mind would ever surrender their soldiers and military people to the laws of another country.

Do you have historical knowledge on the concept of immunity as it relates to war?

Please continue to wisely share your thoughts on this issue, from an historical perspective.

Thanks in advance.

Jake,

Since when is it our call to stay in a country that isn't our own?

SnakeDaJake is right. If I read that article correctly, we are negotiating to leave in 2010. Now, if the administration really wanted to stay that bad, wouldn't there be no agreement in the negotiation at all contrart to what the article stated?

I think this has more to do with the fact that most people who don't take this news as good WANT us to stay there longer and WANT the war to continue for their own political gain. They see any news on Iraq, paint it negatively, attach it to Bush and use it to sell their political agenda. I for one am HAPPY we want to get out, but also happy we arent dropping everything and running.

To TheJonesGirl,

It is PARTIALLY our call to stay in a country that isn't our own because it will be our military who will be expected by the entire world to move right back in if they can't handle the situation they so desparately wanted to get into.

SDJ, from my perspective, any AP report is simply an opinion piece. There has been so much misleading, so many misjudgments and so many lies that to look at any MSM report and just swallow the hook, sinker and line would be foolish.There is a very fine line between cynicism and cautious wariness.

Nope, it isn't our call or our country. If they want us out, we need to be gone.

Agreed Spooky, more and more the AP publishes opinion instead of fact. However, it could easily go both ways. This article could very well be overstating a lack dedication by the US to troop withdrawal, or it could be overstating the dedication to putting together some sort of plan for removing troops. It is just as easy to criticize someone for viewing this in the light that the administration is finally gearing up to leave, or for falling victim to the very common tendency to view anything this administration does, period, as going against the common good of both Iraq and the US.

You have to admit, there will be people who will praise Bush for killing puppies just as there will be people who will criticize him for saving a baby trapped in a well.

demmy,

Do I need to?!

Its in our best interest and there is no point in drawing references -- it becomes an academic debate because no two wars/situations are exactly the same but to please you:

James Rowley has written extensively on the subject.

references

England helped pioneer the practice due to their many conflicts around the world during there period of hegemony.

Im not doing the legwork for your ignorance.

I expect a certain level of education here, not attitude.

I have a BA in Political Science if that matters, with an emphasis in IR

Thanks in advance

The Jones Girl

It is a nasty world out there. Sometimes people dont do what we want them to do. Thats life.

We will make sure the job is finished.

We have the guns

Its just RealPolitik

The fact is we are there and we are not going to risk having to go back.

That is same rhetoric they used to fight pulling out of Vietnam, we haven't had to go back as of yet...

SnakeDaJake is right. If I read that article correctly, we are negotiating to leave in 2010.

Another U.S. official strongly suggested the 2010 date may be too ambitious...Both sides stress the deal is not final and could fall apart over the issue of legal immunity for American troops..."very difficult" telephone conversation Wednesday in which she pressed the Iraqi leader for more flexibility, particularly on immunity...Pressed repeatedly about reports of a 2010 pullout goal, the official said, "We're not going to put any artificial dates out there."

Within the realm of political lingo, it doesn't sound like the Administration is pushing to get out of Iraq... by 2010 or otherwise.

I have a BA in Political Science if that matters, with an emphasis in IR

Having a degree does not make you the consummate expert in any field. It is a piece of paper citing an accomplishment, but by no means makes you an expert, nor that your are right by default.

Anyone who reads could acquire the same knowledge, possibly an even better grasp of the knowledge (by the freedom of knowledge exploration not guided by the ideals of a particular professor) of political science, medicine or any subject for that matter...

Knowledge is not limited to the halls and walls of universities.

Im not doing the legwork for your ignorance.

I expect a certain level of education here, not attitude.

LOL um your the one with the attitude and yeah we expect people o back their crap up when they make blanket statements like you have.
And yeah we are educated, but not in every subject.
He was very kind in his request and you come back attacking him and who has an attitude?
we left kuiwait when we freeded it, left iraq when we chased saddam out of there.. we left panama when we grabbed noriega,.. we didn't quible about immunity agree,metns.. so if your going to get all outlandish that anyone would be offended by this.. explain your self.. as our motto is to grow smarter.. that means get off your box and if you have something to offer .. offer it.

Pah Leez...Vietnam...oh gawd

Within the realm of typical newsvine lingo it sounds like you are pushing to make me believe we enjoy being there...

sorry dont buy it. And we cant just say when we are leaving...announcing plans to everyone. think about it.

demmy, newsvine ppl,
I apologize. I didnt take it that way.(sliding soap box under bed)

There was no need to do that in Kuwait and Iraq due to the context of that war in 91. Had we toppled Saddam perhaps we would have needed to. Panama we were greeting overwhelmingly as liberators by the Panamanian people.

As I said before its a slippery slope to draw references from other wars because they are all different in this respect.

But due to the tension in the middle east right now, I think, it would be prudent to immune ourselves from any Islamic backlash that could cause much more harm than has already been done.

Within the realm of typical newsvine lingo it sounds like you are pushing to make me believe we enjoy being there

We, as in the citizens and the troops, no "we" don't enjoy being there, "we" have been calling for a withdraw as a majority for years.

We as in the war profiteers, we as in the military industrial complex, we as in the Cheney/ Bush train, I fully believe that yes we in this paragraph enjoy us being there and want to stay there, we as in this paragraph want to expand the war.

It is a nasty world out there. Sometimes people dont do what we want them to do.

Again, it isn't our country. Imagine it was reversed, with say, France sitting in the US as a military force. Is it still their call when to leave because it is their army, or is it ours?

I think four years studying IR gives me some credence to speak intelligently on the subject. It doesnt mean you HAVE to have one to know what your talking about, but it helps.

Most lay people are not introduced to the materials that we are. Or at least it is difficult unless someone is introducing you to the material and current trends in Political thought. So it does matter for something and that all I was sayin.

It doesnt mean only people with degrees in PS can speak intelligently on the subject...far from it

If France occupied the US then yes they would dictate terms of withdrawl. How can we MAKE them do anything?

They have the power

The problem with us making the decision is we are playing the humanitarian, we are not occupiers, we will leave when Iraq wants us to leave card when it is convenient, then when Iraq wants us to leave we hemhaw around and come up with excuses to stay.

They want us out, we need to leave.

Again, it isn't our country. Imagine it was reversed, with say, France sitting in the US as a military force. Is it still their call when to leave because it is their army, or is it ours?

Well technically it is the conquering countries call on when, if ever, they leave.

However unless we want this to be viewed as an imperial conquest and not liberation (spare us the it is an imperial conquest argument please) then we should leave when we are asked to do so.

If it walks like an imperial conquest and talks like an imperial conquest... ;-)

If it walks like an imperial conquest and talks like an imperial conquest

maybe so but irrelevant to my point.

very well could be true. But what is wrong with that?

Its up to Barak to finish....

no you see this is a time horizon ™ *

[satire]Time horizon is a registered trademark of the gop and can not be defined as a time table and is not a synonym for time table it just means the same thing. This term can not be used to make snarky comments disparaging the gop.

starting to. It takes time !

Sorry there is no Drive-Thru for withdrawing troops

so your sayign a time tbale it ok.. like buish has been chantign no way for 7 years now?

The first major oil contracts from Iraq in 35 years.

The first major oil contracts from Iraq in 35 years.

Which was Cheney's true goal. See Kevin Shield's American Theocracy (New York:2006, Penguin Books)

Before the invasion Cheney was pouring over maps of Iraqi oilfields at Halliburton offices (and I heard drool was coming out of his mouth, as well).

If France occupied the US then yes they would dictate terms of withdrawl. How can we MAKE them do anything? They have the power

SDJ, Do you think there would be any less chaos here if this was the case? Occupations don't work. Never have never will. If outside influences were in control of your house, wouldn't you revolt? Ill admit I was against the Iraq war before it even started. (a little homework can be a great thing) but every time there's been an improvement, I've been hopeful as to the whole situation's success. The problem it's never really any better. Paying them not to shoot at us? How is this democracy? Iraq sits with a 79 billion dollar surplus while we hemmorage $. Smacks of corporate greed to me.

Those are three very important questions. Is the federal Iraqi gov't solidified? What are the Kurds up to?

The questions are pointless. If the Iraqis are saying "Get out", then we should get out. Period.

1. They (multinational oil companies) have the oil flowing again.

I believe it's still not up to Iraqi standards pre-invasion by the USA. Confirm.

2. Iraq has an internal security force armed and trained to protect said interests.

Describe said force in detail and their accomplishments.

3. Iraq has an elected government and constitution they can agree on and civil rights protection (for the most part).

Confirm that the Iraqi constitution has been fully ratified.

Thanks in advance...

Annoyed, didn't you ever learn the lesson as a kid that you don't always know whats best for you?

The Iraqi Government wants to prove that they can handle their own situation, I don't find anything wrong with allowing them to do so, while taking some caution that everything doesn't fall apart, which is the plan being put into effect now.

Kyle: Sure, I learned that lesson as a child. These people aren't children. They're all grown up and fully aware they are in a position they don't want to be in anymore.

Its a life lesson, not a lesson strictly for children. I am fully aware they don't want us there anymore and I wish we could just get up and leave, but once again, we are not children either. Children often tend to pick up and walk away from a problem instead of solving it. We created as many problems in Iraq as we have solved, if not more, and it would be childish to just leave. Remember, the wrong way is usually the easy way. We need to oversee a stable and concrete return to Iraqi power as quickly as possible, so we can leave knowing something was accomplished.

Annoyed:

The questions are pointless.

I am not suggesting here that we should not respect their wishes if they want us to leave, but these were the things 'promised' to the people of Iraq by our administration, and they are still part of the administrations plans.

Demmy:
1. I don't think there were any stipulations as to "pre-invasion conditions" (if you have a link please share it), but here is a good article from USA Today, from June of this year, that talks about the state of Iraq's oil industry.
2. Here, there is a lot of good info about their size and the time line that has brought them to be in the lead for maintaining security for about 80% of the country.
3. Constitution. You're Welcome, but this is the last time I Google stuff for you, this is all widely know info, reported on over the last 3 years.

Kyle: I agree we can't just pick up and leave after the mess we created. That's why the negotiations are speaking about a 2 year window. But think about this. The Iraqis have a far greater knowledge of what they want more than what we want. Sheesh, we have NO IDEA what their ideals are. Do you honestly think that this is the first time the Iraqis have said that they want us out? I'll bet the Iraqis feel like prisoners in their own country right now. Even if they don't, this is in an area that we shouldn't be in. It simply upsets a whole bunch of people. The U.S. is again attempting to force "our way" onto other "less fortunate" countries. Oh, and there just happens to be a tiny bit of oil over there, and our current administration has absolutely no ties to oil. I'm sure the whole reason we're there is to free the Iraqis, and rid us of the threat of wmds.

You simply can't argue the matter. This is one of those "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situations. Both sides have legitimate arguments. Both sides are wrong, both sides are right. You do the hokey pokey and you turn yourself around.

How nice would it be if one of these days we stop policing the world and start fixing our own problems.

rbrazys: Do you think the Iraqi people ever heard of these 'promises'?

I wish we could just get up and leave, but once again, we are not children either. Children often tend to pick up and walk away from a problem instead of solving it. We created as many problems in Iraq as we have solved, if not more, and it would be childish to just leave

.

That's RIGHT children... when someone asks you to leave.. you don't have too.. sometimes you have obligations to not leave.. like if your fallign down drunk trashign someone home and they threaten to call the cops... YOU MUST STAY.. you broke some crap and you'll be sober enough ina few hours to duck tape it all back together.
Thanks.. I wont be taking parenting advice from you.

That's a great question, though I do not know the answer, I would venture to guess, yes, and perhaps even more. You know... the whole campaign for hearts and minds. Seems to me "Don't worry, we'll fix it" was part of that. But the contractors et.al., (who knew what they were getting into going over there) have been behind and over budget on damn near everything they have tried to build or rebuild. But here is the site dedicated to the reports and updates, SIGIR.

JoulesBeef, I would be sorry for myself if I was your child.

I want us to get out of Iraq just as much as the next person, howeverit just doesn't make sense to pick up and leave immediately without some concrete plan that the government there can handle it. I think we are very very close to that point and in that respect, we should start withdrawing troops immediately. However, to insist on it no matter what is outright dangerous.

Fully and Totally Planned (No Really!!) Regional Anti-Terrorist Redeployment.

IOW, "They didn't ask us to leave, we were on our way out already." Or, "You can't fire me, I quit!"

your Yankee ingenuity

Don't insult me; I'm from Texas. ;-)

Quiet, United Iraq Tactic

Operation: "Oops! We thought we were in Afghanistan, I KNEW we should've taken that left turn at Albequerque"

Spiffie, I stand corrected. I should have said "your Yankee, Dixie, European, Asian, Australian or Extra-terrestrial ingenuity . . . " Hope I haven't missed anyone.

Thanks for some great suggestions, guys! (And gals. And transgendered persons).

1 for agreed.

Exactly why I think its foolish to pick up and leave without some sort of plan of action and a promise to extend our stay briefly if order is lost.