home

Leaving Iraq

By TChris, Section War In Iraq
Posted on Mon Nov 27, 2006 at 08:09:19 AM EST
Tags: Iraq, Britain (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Will the president criticize his war allies for exploring the cut-and-run option?

Britain said Monday it expects to withdraw thousands of its 7,000 military personnel from Iraq by the end of next year, while Poland and Italy announced the impending withdrawal of their remaining troops.

< The Divisive Issue of Peace | Populism, Politics and Governance >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Leaving Iraq | 22 comments (22 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    I guess (5.00 / 3) (#21)
    by Che's Lounge on Mon Nov 27, 2006 at 05:26:19 PM EST
    We have them right where they want us.

    Got a paper towel Che? (none / 0) (#22)
    by Edger on Mon Nov 27, 2006 at 05:31:52 PM EST
    Need to wipe the coffee off my monitor. Heh!

    Parent
    Sounds like (4.00 / 1) (#1)
    by aw on Mon Nov 27, 2006 at 10:47:12 AM EST
    they're getting ready to declare victory in their sector and leave.  Maybe they hope Bush is also getting pushed in that direction.  If he criticizes them for it, well, he'll be standing alone, like a nutcase ranting on a street corner.

    Smoke and Mirrors (4.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Edger on Mon Nov 27, 2006 at 11:04:18 AM EST
    Plans for Redrawing the Middle East: The Project for a "New Middle East"
    by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya
    Global Research, November 18, 2006
    • "Hegemony is as old as Mankind..."
      --Zbigniew Brzezinski, former U.S. National Security Advisor

    The term "New Middle East" was introduced to the world in June 2006 in Tel Aviv by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (who was credited by the Western media for coining the term) in replacement of the older and more imposing term, the "Greater Middle East."
    ...
    ...The Israeli attacks on Lebanon --which had been fully endorsed by Washington and London-- have further compromised and validated the existence of the geo-strategic objectives of the United States, Britain, and Israel. According to Professor Mark Levine the "neo-liberal globalizers and neo-conservatives, and ultimately the Bush Administration, would latch on to creative destruction as a way of describing the process by which they hoped to create their new world orders," and that "creative destruction [in] the United States was, in the words of neo-conservative philosopher and Bush adviser Michael Ledeen, `an awesome revolutionary force' for (...) creative destruction..."2

    Anglo-American occupied Iraq, particularly Iraqi Kurdistan, seems to be the preparatory ground for the balkanization (division) and finlandization (pacification) of the Middle East. Already the legislative framework, under the Iraqi Parliament and the name of Iraqi federalization, for the partition of Iraq into three portions is being drawn out.
    ...
    The Map of the "New Middle East"
    A relatively unknown map of the Middle East, NATO-garrisoned Afghanistan, and Pakistan has been circulating around strategic, governmental, NATO, policy and military circles since mid-2006. It has been causally allowed to surface in public, maybe in an attempt to build consensus and to slowly prepare the general public for possible, maybe even cataclysmic, changes in the Middle East. This is a map of a redrawn and restructured Middle East identified as the "New Middle East."
     
    I guess (none / 0) (#4)
    by aw on Mon Nov 27, 2006 at 11:09:27 AM EST
    this murderous fantasy is as good as the next one.

    Parent
    Yeah... (none / 0) (#6)
    by Edger on Mon Nov 27, 2006 at 11:25:29 AM EST
    Speaking of fantasies did you notice that in their map Iraq is called "Sunni Iraq"?

    Their latest attempts to shift their support to the Sunnis are only that: their latest attempts.

    The Iraqis have gained NOTHING and, indeed, under the current negotiations may wind up back in the hands of a Bathist Sunni strongman -Tariq Aziz is being or has been set free to aid in these negotiations.

    It's a very short step from Tariq Aziz to his boss.



    Parent
    A perfect illustration of (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by aw on Mon Nov 27, 2006 at 11:33:07 AM EST
    First time as tragedy, second time as bloody farce.

    Parent
    Nicely Done Tchris (4.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Jlvngstn on Mon Nov 27, 2006 at 01:02:12 PM EST
    Why is it acceptable to chastise the dems on a regular basis as the "cut and run party" and not the British here?

    Politics or cowardice?

    What? (none / 0) (#11)
    by aw on Mon Nov 27, 2006 at 01:10:03 PM EST
    Huh?

    Parent
    I have the... (none / 0) (#12)
    by Edger on Mon Nov 27, 2006 at 01:16:05 PM EST
    ...same reaction as aw. Can you rephrase your question, J?

    Parent
    Jlvngstn just wants to know why... (none / 0) (#14)
    by Bill Arnett on Mon Nov 27, 2006 at 01:52:27 PM EST
    ...the dems suffer endless criticism for wanting to "cut and run", yet no one, not even rethug meanies, has heaped any harsh criticism of an equivalent nature and in that pejorative nasty way on ANY of the governments now wanting to withdraw their troops.

    I believe it is because that would REALLY isolate bush.bush

    Parent

    He would have to... (4.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Edger on Mon Nov 27, 2006 at 02:14:26 PM EST
    ...start criticizing himself for emboldening the terrists.

    Then he'd have to preemptively invade the White House and use overwhelming military force to achieve regime change and instill freedom and democracy there.

    This could be a problem.

    Better to just shut up and let the allies leave Iraq.

    Parent

    You crack me up, Edger (4.00 / 1) (#17)
    by aw on Mon Nov 27, 2006 at 02:25:46 PM EST
    Here's a good post by Arthur at Power of Narrative:

    Actually this is an excerpt that he posted but elaborates on:

    All sentences beginning, "What we should now do in Iraq ... " are devoid of meaning. We are in no position to do anything. We have no potency; that is the definition of anarchy.

    ...

    [Bush and Blair] will have to stop the holier-than-thou name-calling and the pretence that they hold any cards. They will have to realise that this war has lost them all leverage in the region. They can insult and sanction and threaten. But there is nothing left for them to "do" but leave. They are no longer the subject of that mighty verb, only its painful object.

    link

    Parent

    I was just trying to... (none / 0) (#18)
    by Edger on Mon Nov 27, 2006 at 02:35:16 PM EST
    ...highlight the silliness of Bush's positions. But he really doesn't need any help looking foolish, I guess.

    Good link. Thanks, aw.

    Parent

    LMAO. Thanx, Edger! (none / 0) (#19)
    by Bill Arnett on Mon Nov 27, 2006 at 02:42:04 PM EST


    Parent
    Okay (none / 0) (#15)
    by aw on Mon Nov 27, 2006 at 02:00:37 PM EST
    I guess it was the "here" that threw me off.  I took it to mean "here" at TalkLeft, which didn't make any sense.

    Parent
    I don't think bush has enough credibility... (none / 0) (#3)
    by Bill Arnett on Mon Nov 27, 2006 at 11:08:01 AM EST
    ...left that anyone will ever listen to him again, especially criticism.

    It would be kind of like being criticized by Bozo the Clown, but less intelligent and certainly less entertaining.

    'Mornin', aw and everybody.

    Good morning, Bill (none / 0) (#5)
    by aw on Mon Nov 27, 2006 at 11:10:54 AM EST
    and everyone, also.

    Parent
    According to Leno Bozo was a very nice man. (none / 0) (#8)
    by JSN on Mon Nov 27, 2006 at 11:59:26 AM EST


    Parent
    I speak only of Bozo's political acumen... (none / 0) (#9)
    by Bill Arnett on Mon Nov 27, 2006 at 12:03:14 PM EST
    ...and certainly mean no offense to the MAN himself.

    Parent
    What about Poland! (none / 0) (#13)
    by Sailor on Mon Nov 27, 2006 at 01:34:43 PM EST
    The coalition of the shilling gets it,  the American people get it, the iraqis keep getting it.

    Bush should pull out like his father should have.

    Cole (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by squeaky on Mon Nov 27, 2006 at 02:57:28 PM EST
    Juan Cole asks the obvious: What is the Mission?
    .....Ramadi and its environs. This Sunni Arab city of 400,000 west of Baghdad is under continual siege. I want to ask a question here. Why? When and under what conditions will it be lifted?

    Since there is no answer to the question it amounts to, as Cole puts it, a game of russian roulette. Cole tries to envision how we will know when the undefined "mission" wiii be accomplished.

    At what point will the people of Ramadi wake up in the morning and say, 'We've changed our minds. We like the new government dominated by Shiite ayatollahs and Kurdish warlords. We're happy to host Western Occupation troops on our soil. We don't care if those troops are allied with the Israeli military, which is daily bombing our brethren in Gaza and killing them and keeping them down. We're changed persons. We're not going to bother to set any IEDs tonight and we've put away our sniping rifles.'

    Juan Cole

    Ramadi is a microcosm for all of Iraq.  

    Time to leave and pay at the door. No more blood letting or destruction is going to accomplish anything except profits for those invested in the war/death industry.

    Parent

    Leaving Iraq | 22 comments (22 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment