Comments

You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name

Your e-mail (optional)

Website (optional)

	My Original Nic Pic-a-Nic Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Foto

Submit your comments on this article

Iraq

Iraqi PM tells US Congress biggest threat is terror

2006-07-27

(KUNA) -- Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki addressed a joint meeting of Congress on Wednesday, saying that the biggest challenge Iraq faces is the threat of terror. Speaking before Senators, Representatives of the House and members of the White House Cabinet, the newly appointed prime minister vowed that terrorists who kill civilians would face the same fate as the former Al-Qaeda leader in Iraq Abu-Musab Al-Zarqawi who was killed by US fire.

His address to Congress came one day after he met for the first time at the White House with US President George W. Bush, although the two leaders met last month when Bush made an unannounced visit to Iraq. Bush and Al-Maliki announced after their meeting that the number of US and Iraqi forces in Baghdad would be bolstered beyond the nearly 44,000 already there. But they stopped short of saying how many forces would be relocated from other parts of the country to Baghdad in the coming weeks.

Posted by:Fred

#6 It's Muzzy Democracy. Here's how I think it works.

By agreement, they divvy up the positions. The Shia get the PM, IM, etc, the Sunnis the DM, etc, The Kurds the Pres, etc. - it's a bullshit formula based upon the usual irrelevant things.

They form alliances - based upon sect or "racial" group. The Shia banded together into a block to maximize their seat count and to squabble over candidates for their allotted positions in private. The Kurds did too. The Sunni aren't quite so cohesive. The remainder end up with little except the ability to vote for / against nominees.

The party block within each group that has the most seats, per election results in each district, chooses the candidates for the posts that are available to their group.

The PM, as with all other national positions, must be approved by a majority of the Parliament. Then he puts forward the nominees for each post allotted to his group. Same for the other groups who won enough seats in the elections.

That's the game as I understand it. It sucks since its party slates put forward after the fact, the public doesn't get to vote for individuals.

As for his support for Hezbollah, anyone raised within a Muslim country is thoroughly conditioned to hate Jooos. I wouldn't doubt that, out of the supposed Muslim population of 1.2 Bn, the number of Muslims who aren't Jooo-haters would number in the tens of thousands world-wide, if that many. It passes for "normal" among Muslims and everyone should expect it, not act like it's an aberration. It's silly to think otherwise, in fact. Those jackasses who "boycotted" his speech are morons who know far less than the average Rantburger.

Posted by: Angolutle Fleresh8883 2006-07-27 10:12

#5 I agree about the parliamentary thing, but I would think the Members of Parliament elect him as opposed to him beiong appointed; but maybe it is a leftover of the King appointing his Prime Minister.

Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-07-27 09:49

#4 Yes Nimble. I believe how their Parliment system works is the people vote for the party they want, the party with the most votes appoints a PM. I could be wrong, since Parlimentry systems give me a headache (Worst form of democracy EVER).

Also, when he says "terror" he means "Iran".

Posted by: DarthVader 2006-07-27 09:44

#3 Was he appointed or elected?

Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-07-27 06:45

#2 Hey, this democracy thing is starting to work!

And no, he's not going to blame Hezballah just yet because he doesn't want to die. Wait until they get neutered before you ask those kinds of questions. The disrespectful congressmen who walked out or boycotted him should understand that. They don't represent me.

Posted by: gorb 2006-07-27 02:50

#1 Kill Tater and tots

Posted by: Captain America 2006-07-27 00:51

00:00