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.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Iraq
Iraqi bill demands U.S. troops withdraw
2007-05-10
A majority of Iraqi lawmakers have endorsed a bill calling for a timetable for the withdrawal of foreign troops and demanding a freeze on the number of foreign troops already in the country, lawmakers said Thursday. The legislation was being debated even as U.S. lawmakers were locked in a dispute with the White House over their call to start reducing the size of the U.S. force here in the coming months.

The Iraqi bill, drafted by a parliamentary bloc loyal to anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, was signed by 144 members of the 275-member house, according to Nassar al-Rubaie, the leader of the Sadrist bloc. The Sadrist bloc, which sees the U.S.-led forces as an occupying army, has pushed similar bills before, but this was the first time it had garnered the support of a majority of lawmakers.

The bill would require the Iraqi government to seek approval from parliament before it requests an extension of the U.N. mandate for foreign forces to be in Iraq, al-Rubaie said. It also calls for a timetable for the troop withdrawal and a freeze on the size of the foreign forces.

The U.N. Security Council voted unanimously in November to extend the U.S.-led forces' mandate until the end of 2007. The resolution, however, said the council "will terminate this mandate earlier if requested by the government of Iraq."

Al-Rubaie said he personally handed the Iraqi bill to speaker Mahmoud al-Mashhadani on Wednesday.

Deputy Speaker Khaled al-Attiyah told The Associated Press the draft legislation had not been officially submitted to the speaker, but was currently being reviewed by the house's legal department, apparently the final step before it can be submitted. Al-Rubaie said al-Mashhadani had a week to schedule a debate on the bill before he would use the majority that backs it to force a debate.
Posted by:Anonymoose

#21  Maintain a division and an air wing in Kurdistan.
Posted by: Chomock Wittlesbach8440   2007-05-10 22:18  

#20  They want death, they got it.
Posted by: anonymous2u   2007-05-10 22:06  

#19  Assuming this is true, the attempt to pass this law would either affirm that Iraqis desire a continued U.S. military presence or it would enable a painless exit strategy on our part.

We could accelerate the timetable to prepare the Iraqi forces to handle their security responsibilities and begin a rapid phased withdrawal knowing that the ultimate pressure to function as a country rested on the Iraqi people and legislators.

And in the dire scenario that Iraq were to drift beyond sectarian strife and toward a civil war, our personnel would be far less exposed. Remember, there are also other hot spots in the world where we have to be prepared to intervene, if necessary.
Posted by: Grumenk Philalzabod0723   2007-05-10 20:04  

#18  The current parliamentarians want US withdrawl so that the Shiite majority would be free to attack Sunnis. It is time to admit that, post intervention, Muslim imams of both sects were able to dominate politics in Iraq. Another election involving a better representation of Iraqis, would yield different results.

Occupied Japanese and Germans were never put into the position of legislating removal of occupiers. Let's not forget that 9-11 was executed in the name of religion.
Posted by: Sneaze   2007-05-10 18:50  

#17  Was this bill drafted in Iran and approved from the safety of the green zone?
Posted by: gorb   2007-05-10 18:48  

#16  Hey tu...Snaggle-tooth does sneak back to Iraq on occasion...under the cover of darkness in burka. It allows him to embrace his inner-transvestite, anyway.
Posted by: anymouse   2007-05-10 18:27  

#15   i think would be more bothered by what their own ppl are doing than the US troop presence. i fit wasn't for us iran and syria would have teamed up and took their piesec of shit asses over already
Posted by: sinse   2007-05-10 17:25  

#14  From HotAir --
more of the story is revealed...

Al Rubaie said Al Mashhadani had a week to schedule a debate on the bill before he would use the majority that backs it to force one.

However, his majority might be shaky.

Kurdish lawmaker Mahmoud Othman said he had backed the draft but only on the condition that the withdrawal timetable be linked to a schedule for training and equipping IraqÂ’s security forces.

“But the sponsors of the legislation did not include our observations in the draft. This is deception,” he said.
Posted by: Sherry   2007-05-10 16:53  

#13  And another thing: if the Iraqi parliament were to ask us to leave, we'd leave. Nice and easy, make sure the Iraqi army has all the training we can provide on the way out, and have a bunch of parades both there and here.

And be ready to help protect the Kurds when they break away and ask us to come back.
Posted by: Steve White   2007-05-10 16:48  

#12  On Sadr: Orrin Judd has a different view, he thinks we're protecting Sadr so that we can use him later. He thinks the future there is with the Shi'a, so that the sooner we whump all the Sunnis, set the Kurds free (if they wish) and let the Shi'a get themselves organized, the better.

I might buy into that if it then meant that the Arab Shi'a in Kuzestan would peel off from Iran and join a new Shi'astan, but I think the Mad Mullahs wouldn't like that much.
Posted by: Steve White   2007-05-10 16:45  

#11  I'm torn at this.

It seems our congress and theirs want us out. That means big nuclear war in about 10 years I figure.

But the power to make war is with the congress. so I guess we should leave.

Record some GPS coordinates on the way out boys.
Posted by: flash91   2007-05-10 16:36  

#10  Ever consider that it might be better if this effort went Tango Uniform now? The inevitable blood bath would ensue and we could begin to recover sooner rather than later.

A real war is coming, and it will be worse the longer it is delayed.
Posted by: SR-71   2007-05-10 16:31  

#9  Don't bitch about the Iraqi vacation. Our reps work far less and don't get shot at.
Posted by: Chuck Simmins   2007-05-10 16:05  

#8  I hope Cheney told them something to the effect of, "If you go on vacation, we will install a competent government before you come back."
Posted by: Mike N.   2007-05-10 15:14  

#7  drafted by a parliamentary bloc loyal to anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr

Hey, Mr. Tooth Decay? How's the weather in Tehran, ya pussy...
Posted by: tu3031   2007-05-10 15:13  

#6  Isn't it funny how once these backwater thugs get a little breathing room they suddenly become so damned smart. I still say we need to pull in our troops for an eight week R&R session while letting things spin out of control in the green zone. Maybe a few legislators getting offed by some car bombs will inspire a little more cooperation.

Oh, and while we're at it, we really need to cap Sadr's worthless ass.
Posted by: Zenster   2007-05-10 15:08  

#5  I guess, the Shia believe that they can manage the Sunni remnants without USA---with maybe a little help from Iran.
Posted by: gromgoru   2007-05-10 14:01  

#4  and Pres Bush has reported, Cheney's visit was to tell them, "NO two month vacation."
Posted by: Sherry   2007-05-10 13:16  

#3  I, for one, am sick to death of the muslim stringers used for "reports". It stinks. It stinks of manipulation and falsehoods. Screw AP.
Posted by: Thinemp Whimble   2007-05-10 12:44  

#2  Nah, the Iraqi Parliment is gonna show us! They're not gonna allow Queen Nancy and Prince Harry to pull us out on their timetable, the Parliment will make up one of their own!
Posted by: Bobby   2007-05-10 12:43  

#1  Important note: AP author: QASSIM ABDUL-ZAHRA

Use of salt suggested until confirmed.
Posted by: Anonymoose   2007-05-10 12:13  

00:00