View Full Version : America to pull out of Iraq by 2011
CountArach
10-16-2008, 10:06
That's not surrender! That's victory!
AP has the story (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h-5dqDuZE7oT9VMPBDYPeWO14ZkQD93R86T00)
BAGHDAD (AP) — American troops could face trial before Iraqi courts for major crimes committed off base and when not on missions, under a draft security pact hammered out in months of tortuous negotiations, Iraqi officials familiar with the accord said Wednesday.
The draft also calls for U.S. troops to leave Iraqi cities by the end of June and withdraw from the country entirely by Dec. 31, 2011, unless the Baghdad government asks some of them to stay for training or security support, the officials said.
It would also give the Iraqis a greater role in U.S. military operations and full control of the Green Zone, the 3 1/2-square mile area of central Baghdad that includes the U.S. Embassy and major Iraqi government offices.
One senior Iraqi official said Baghdad may demand even more concessions before the draft is submitted to parliament for a final decision. The two sides are working against a deadline of year's end when the U.N. mandate authorizing the U.S.-led mission expires.
3 years is far too long, but at least its a step in the right direction.
https://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r44/CountArach/mission-accomplished.jpg
the wording says "combat" troops.
i imagine there will be a 'logistical' and 'support' footprint for years to come.
CountArach
10-16-2008, 11:48
the wording says "combat" troops.
i imagine there will be a 'logistical' and 'support' footprint for years to come.
No doubt, but still as long as the majority of soldiers are gone, I would be... mildly satisfied...
The draft also calls for U.S. troops to leave Iraqi cities by the end of June and withdraw from the country entirely by Dec. 31, 2011, unless the Baghdad government asks some of them to stay for training or security support, the officials said.Sounds reasonable to me. :shrug:
Hooahguy
10-16-2008, 18:16
yea, sounds ok to me.....
but i would rather base the pullout on whether the iraqs as a people are ready.... i think they are.... but we should give thm a few more months, lets see how they react to whoever becomes president....
American troops could face trial before Iraqi courts for major crimes committed off base and when not on missions, under a draft security pact hammered out in months of tortuous negotiations, Iraqi officials familiar with the accord said Wednesday.
This caught my attention the most. I wonder how this will play out if we fully pull out on time. Will this happen while we are there or until after we left? And what will happen to those convicted? Reading the article about that wasn't very heartening. Also, the mention of accidental civilian deaths during combat operations might be overplayed. Imho, if they are worried about our people, and are willing to challenge us over them. Then I would say they should investigate themselves first and try those that actually commited atrocities against their own people. Then when they show that they can handle themselves. They then can try our people unless we've already done it for them.
Another thing is, is that I hardly hear of the other nations who are in Iraq and how will this affect them? Will they just get up and leave when we begin pulling out around the same time as us? And also hasn't Britian already reduced their personnel within Iraq already?
I'm thinking that does sound reasonable though for a pull-out. Though I wouldn't go pronouncing it to the world when we come to a decision on the time to leave.
Koga No Goshi
10-16-2008, 19:16
This caught my attention the most. I wonder how this will play out if we fully pull out on time.
Wouldn't we just ignore it? Didn't we ignore the Iraqi Government trying to forbid the use of Blackwater in their country? They're still there.
Wouldn't we just ignore it? Didn't we ignore the Iraqi Government trying to forbid the use of Blackwater in their country? They're still there.
True but our President will be different and the current administration seems more likely to follow what you posted.
PanzerJaeger
10-16-2008, 21:15
That's not surrender! That's victory!
I agree. ~;)
Seamus Fermanagh
10-16-2008, 23:24
Pull out? Doesn't sound manly to me.
R.I.P. George! You made me laugh.
Tribesman
10-17-2008, 00:20
That's not surrender! That's victory!
:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
yeah right , victory eh :laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
Incongruous
10-17-2008, 00:23
Can we air lift the oil fields to Texas?
They won't fit in Hammersmith!
Strike For The South
10-17-2008, 00:27
Can we air lift the oil fields to Texas?
They won't fit in Hammersmith!
pffft any real Texan knows its all about WIND BABY
Kadagar_AV
10-17-2008, 02:06
American troops could face trial before Iraqi courts for major crimes committed off base and when not on missions, under a draft security pact hammered out in months of tortuous negotiations, Iraqi officials familiar with the accord said Wednesday.
Maybe the day will come when US troops also will face trial for war crimes...
PanzerJaeger
10-17-2008, 02:08
Maybe the day will come when US troops also will face trial for war crimes...
Don't get your hopes up. Not even Barack would be that stupid.. and thank God for that. :yes:
yea, sounds ok to me.....
but i would rather base the pullout on whether the iraqs as a people are ready.... i think they are.... but we should give thm a few more months, lets see how they react to whoever becomes president....
They have 3 more years.
They have 3 more years.
Or better when we are not there in significant numbers...
Let's just hope that in three years that it's calmed down enough that there aren't too many troops to even pull out. :balloon2:
CountArach
10-17-2008, 07:19
Maybe the day will come when US troops also will face trial for war crimes...
Nope.
Kadagar_AV
10-17-2008, 07:27
That scares me:(
A bit funny though that the country playing world police refuse to follow international laws...
Incongruous
10-17-2008, 08:04
That scares me:(
A bit funny though that the country playing world police refuse to follow international laws...
Ha! So you reckon its a good idea to put the average soldier on trial? Or even lower officers? Jesus its not them that are demanding an increase in high altitude bombings or deciding how much money is spent on Iraq. They are the poor buggers who have to actually hold a damned gun and take peoples lives, watch their friends get torn up by bombs and live with the civilian deatsh they may have themselves inflicted.
Any man serving in Iraq has my damned respect no matter what he believes he is fighting for, demanding that they be put on trial for making a living is cowardly and unjust.
I suggest you go take a tour in Iraq or Afghanistan beforehand.
Kadagar_AV
10-17-2008, 08:23
Ha! So you reckon its a good idea to put the average soldier on trial? Or even lower officers? Jesus its not them that are demanding an increase in high altitude bombings or deciding how much money is spent on Iraq. They are the poor buggers who have to actually hold a damned gun and take peoples lives, watch their friends get torn up by bombs and live with the civilian deatsh they may have themselves inflicted.
Any man serving in Iraq has my damned respect no matter what he believes he is fighting for, demanding that they be put on trial for making a living is cowardly and unjust.
I suggest you go take a tour in Iraq or Afghanistan beforehand.
1. War crimes are not commited by higher ranking officers only. By your logic, there would be no Guantanamo base, as they are all footsloggers.
2. I agree that the higher command in the US has much to answer for, however, not many would be sent to trial as the US-army by large fight following the code of war. now, you might not follow rules when you start a war, but once there you do an OK job (with some exceptions).
3. Why is it cowardly and unjust to think that soldiers who break laws should be sent to trial?
4. I've been to Afghanistan, have you? Not Irak though, but Iran and some other countries on the US death list.
PanzerJaeger
10-17-2008, 08:46
4. I've been to Afghanistan, have you? Not Irak though, but Iran and some other countries on the US death list.
How do you know of the Death List? :inquisitive:
.
..
...
..
.
Welcome to the Death List. :fortune:
Kadagar_AV
10-17-2008, 11:55
Will I get immunity if I watch Faux News for 100 hours?
Tribesman
10-17-2008, 23:51
This topic is just too funny .
You have a draft proposal of a possible agreement that might get sorted with lots of wrangling over the contentious issues and then put forward as a proper proposal that may or may not get passed by the Iraqi government .
All this dealing has to be sorted , passed and enacted as legislation by the end of december :oops:
The only other option available is to go back to the UN to seek an extension of the mandate , which given the current situation in a wider context will allow Putin to play silly buggers with America over the terms.
That's not surrender! That's victory!
:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
Will I get immunity if I watch Faux News for 100 hours?
You'd die trying.
Incongruous
10-18-2008, 03:47
1. War crimes are not commited by higher ranking officers only. By your logic, there would be no Guantanamo base, as they are all footsloggers.
2. I agree that the higher command in the US has much to answer for, however, not many would be sent to trial as the US-army by large fight following the code of war. now, you might not follow rules when you start a war, but once there you do an OK job (with some exceptions).
3. Why is it cowardly and unjust to think that soldiers who break laws should be sent to trial?
4. I've been to Afghanistan, have you? Not Irak though, but Iran and some other countries on the US death list.
Uhuh, I have lost a friend in Aghanistan and see whatit has done to others, these guys don't know what they are fighting for. Most of them are not well educated and do not have the chances people like me do. The situation in Iraq is beyond description its such a bloody cockup, those soldiers are as much victims as anyone else.
It is cowardly and unjust, to go after the small guys.
As for your comment on Gitmo:yes: I would prefer that it did not exist:2thumbsup:
Kadagar_AV
10-18-2008, 04:27
Bopa the Magyar, sorry to hear about your friend:(
I get what you say, I guess I didn't know it was that bad. Still, i do believe in the choice of the individuall soldier... Maybe USA should try to raise their quality of troops to a more educated level.
Swedishfish, and in misery...
Evil_Maniac From Mars
10-18-2008, 04:30
Maybe the day will come when US troops also will face trial for war crimes...
The winner never gets tried.
Yes, I'm still a little bitter about the Soviets. :book:
Incongruous
10-18-2008, 07:01
Bopa the Magyar, sorry to hear about your friend:(
I get what you say, I guess I didn't know it was that bad. Still, i do believe in the choice of the individuall soldier... Maybe USA should try to raise their quality of troops to a more educated level.
Swedishfish, and in misery...
What they should do is ensure that those brave men come back to a society which is proud of them and accepting. Even if you do not agree with the wras, honour the infantry, they need proper housing, health care and foor up in the employment market. Not a trial.
Tribesman
10-18-2008, 10:26
Yes, I'm still a little bitter about the Soviets.
Fun time again Mars , which particular sets of laws would the Soviets have been bound by ?
(have a clue ....its one of the reasons the Nazis used to justify some of their war crimes in the East)
Lord Winter
10-18-2008, 19:34
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7677551.stm
Another big get america out rallly, yes its mainly driven by Sadr but it still shows something about the will of the people. I'm begining to doubt that we can truely do anything in Iraq anymore. My guess is we're out sometime in the first half of 2010 ethier way.
Even afgahnastan I'm having my doubts with. Yes we've crushed the Talbin yes I don't want them in power, but I don't think we can do anything unless if we flood the countryside with a half million troops and get reeady for a long grinding war of atrrition (which we probably can't afford). No matter how many offensives we make the taliban just reatreat into the mountains, rebuild and strike back. Not to mention that every civillian causiltiy that happens is another recuirting tool for Al quida.
At least they decided to demonstrate instead of blowing up another marketplace.
Tribesman
10-19-2008, 21:12
At least they decided to demonstrate instead of blowing up another marketplace.
Yeah right :dizzy2:
So people don't get slaughtered in marketplaces anymore .
So I suppose people getting slaughtered in marketplaces don't count then .
Just because it ain't in your news sources doesn't mean it ain't happening anymore Spmelta...it just means the journalists ain't giving it much attenion nowadays as its got so monotomous
Kralizec
10-19-2008, 21:21
Violence in general is down, though.
Maybe someone on Sadr's side got the brilliant idea of gathering protestors occasionally and see if that's more effective. For the new President it would be easier to do a "peace with honour" kind of exit then.
Tribesman
10-19-2008, 21:42
Maybe someone on Sadr's side got the brilliant idea of gathering protestors occasionally and see if that's more effective.
Sadr's side ????????? Thats the Iranian theocracy isn't it .
Hmmmmm...Sadrs militia ended up fighting the government backed Badr brigade which is funded ,trained and originated from that Iran place with its theocracy thingy isn't it .
Wow Iran got the brilliant idea of telling one group to lay low for a while:2thumbsup:
Well done Fenring:oops:
Kralizec
10-19-2008, 22:16
What are you trying to say? :inquisitive:
Yeah right :dizzy2:
So people don't get slaughtered in marketplaces anymore .
So I suppose people getting slaughtered in marketplaces don't count then .
Just because it ain't in your news sources doesn't mean it ain't happening anymore Spmelta...it just means the journalists ain't giving it much attenion nowadays as its got so monotomous
I'm very well aware that the violence is ongoing. I'm just glad that another 200 people weren't taken out by another bomb which for a while was the usual method for 'protesting.' It's obvious Sadr and his gang are trying to use legitimate means to show their influence. Though he's still a guy I'd rather see dead I was just pointing out that I'm happy he's attempting to use soft power as well, didn't realize I needed to explain myself.
This is my primary news source (http://icasualties.org/oif/) it tracks a lot of the violence going on in Iraq and is far better than normal news sites when it comes to covering Iraq.
Samurai Waki
10-20-2008, 22:18
Both Iraq, and I believe Afghanistan will turn out to be epic failures. The US isn't necessarily surrendering because it isn't giving anything really to the Iraqis after the pullout period, but it will be a peace I suppose, hopefully it will be a good one. I never liked the idea of Iraq from the beginning, and it's officially destroyed our tenure in Afghanistan. What the US needs to do, is formally withdraw from Iraq, put more boots on the ground in Afghanistan, re-administer from the center, while reaching out in whatever ways it can to rectify the situation there, you know, appease the Pakistanis in some small ways, and unfortunately include the Taliban in the government, hopefully the people might eventually turn sway, but that'd be long after we're already gone.
Tribesman
10-21-2008, 01:25
This is my primary news source it tracks a lot of the violence going on in Iraq and is far better than normal news sites when it comes to covering Iraq.
And what trend have you noticed there over the past 6 months regarding the contested Kurdish/Arab areas and those where the ex-Sunni terrorists are now being paid by the US ?
The trend that I've noticed seems to be one of overall decrease in violence. Despite this there continues to be frequent attacks against Iraqi officials and security forces and their families. The contested areas have recently come into the spotlight again, especially Kirkuk, in which Peshmerga forces and Iraqi government forces have had confrontations though not armed conflict, yet. Some of the walled areas of Baghdad are now seeing those walls come down though some of the islands of sunnis in shia seas still retain their blast walls.
The diaspora of insurgents seems to have been primarily into Diyala and Mosul which are now seeing much more violence though not on a scale as was seen previously in the Sunni triangle.
The US paid militias/former terrorists right now are largely the reason that there has been a decrease in violence though many members of these groups are wary of the Iraqi government. The Iraqi governments efforts to incorporate these members into official security forces are being done slowly though there seems little desire to do it at all, the govt. preferring to maintain a Shia dominance in the security forces.
Unfortunately some of the US paid militias/former terrorists are using their 'safe' status to continue violence against the Iraqi govt and/or other militias.
The inability of the Iraqi government to incorporate militiamen into its own organization and payroll and the mistrust of these militiamen against the government could lead to the all out blood letting that was happening earlier. I hope that this issue can be solved somewhat satisfactorily and soon because when the US eventually stops paying these militias/former terrorists what will prevent them from once again becoming 'bad' militias.
Unfortunately I had zero net access from 30May to 28July so I've missed a good portion of news for the last six months. What is your analysis of the last 6 months in relation to the questions you asked me? Same assessment different conclusion or am I missing something big?
Edit: I forgot to mention the migration of a lot Baghdad's christians to Kurdistan and their refusal to leave which is drawing anti christian violence into Kurdistan as well.
Seamus Fermanagh
10-21-2008, 04:29
Fun time again Mars , which particular sets of laws would the Soviets have been bound by ?
(have a clue ....its one of the reasons the Nazis used to justify some of their war crimes in the East)
Wasn't that defense nullified at Nuremburg Tribes? I thought the "they weren't party to any of the relevant treaties" was held to be irrelevant vis-a-vis "crimes against humanity."
Tribesman
10-21-2008, 07:38
Seamus , did you notice the word "some" ?
Evil_Maniac From Mars
10-21-2008, 21:55
I'm considering if I should even bother debating this or not. :rolleyes:
Tribesman
10-22-2008, 01:17
I'm considering if I should even bother debating this or not.
Well do yourself a favour and if you do consider it then at least find out which treaties they are and what they say . Then find which specific actions the politicians and military hierachy of the Third Reich decided they could try and get away with because they said they didn't apply to Russians .:idea2:
It would work out so much better than putting forward your arguement and then trying to find "facts" to fit it again .
The trend that I've noticed seems to be one of overall decrease in violence.
Yes there is a current lull , daily shootings are back to 2004 levels though daily bombings are still above the 2005 level .
Plus as you note the location has shifted which might be down to one large group telling its gunmen to stop for a while and another grouping being currently paid to stop .
I like your edit , a very important little thing , the pershmerga went through a lot of effort in the early occupation to get rid of the Christian communities in their territory , I wonder how much effort they will put in again before the next referendum on the future status of those areas .
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.