Article

2004-06-04 Iraq-Jordan

Minister: Iraq Demands Security Authority

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2004-06-04 12:01:59 AM|| || Front Page|| [3 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 I assume the US will indeed just do a bilateral arrangement with the new interim government if the UNSC attempts to put any more than general language on control of forces in the resolution. Also, the end-date idea is supremely stupid in a typically impractical multilateral way, and I assume that is one other absolute no-go for us.

One semantic quibble, and Zebari's hardly the author of this -- everyone's doing it. There IS a civil war in Iraq ... that's kind of the idea. Most of the trouble is being caused by Iraqis, who are killing other Iraqis and trying to shape the future of Iraq. That's a civil war. We are presently the key ally of one side (or several) in the civil war, and there's good reason to believe that the bulk of the populace favors an outcome we would find desirable -- but it's still a civil war, albeit with foreign intervention. I'm just tired of people talking darkly of the "possibility" of a "civil war" as some kind of possible nightmare scenario, when in fact such a conflict is the very essence of what's going on today. It's a very winnable civil war -- even easily so, by historical measures -- but civil war it (principally) is.

Posted by Verlaine 2004-06-04 12:36:18 AM|| 2004-06-04 12:36:18 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Yeah, there is and there isn't a civil war, given the furriners mucking around in Iraq. A fair number of the fighters are Iraqis, though, and I'd expect that to get worse if we bailed out in the next few months.

One interesting thought I read elsewhere: staying embroiled in Iraq serves Iran and Syria just fine. As long as our troops are in Iraq fighting, rebuilding, etc., they can't be used to clean out the other rat traps. This person advocated pulling our troops into the Kurdish region, using our air power over the rest of Iraq to threaten anyone who tries full-scale civil war, and the daring Sistani, et al., to start running the place responsibility. Then you'd have the forces you need to deal with Syria, the Soodis, etc. I don't buy it but it's an interesting idea.

Posted by Steve White 2004-06-04 12:59:39 AM|| 2004-06-04 12:59:39 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 "Who cares what they think? "
Why Senator John(Nuance)Kerry,of course.

Posted by Raptor 2004-06-04 7:24:14 AM|| 2004-06-04 7:24:14 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 the question is, will the French and Russians have the chutzpah to veto the US - UK resolution on grounds of insufficient authority for the Iraqis, when the Iraqi FM has just said it gives Iraq all the authority it needs? I cant see that happening - there will have to be just enough changes to save face for the weasels. OTOH I thought the weasels would cave on invading Iraq, and I proved monumentally wrong.

Posted by Liberalhawk 2004-06-04 10:21:59 AM|| 2004-06-04 10:21:59 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 the question is, will the French and Russians have the chutzpah to veto the US?

Hmmmm where are those oil-for-palaces documents and oil bribe contracts...we had them right here yesterday...

Posted by Frank G 2004-06-04 10:40:17 AM|| 2004-06-04 10:40:17 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 FG: I think some of the documents you are looking for are in Jim Baker's briefcase.

Posted by Classical_Liberal 2004-06-04 11:50:09 AM|| 2004-06-04 11:50:09 AM|| Front Page Top

14:38 JERKFACE101
08:04 Anonymous5089
01:40 Phil_B
01:23 Damn_Proud_American
01:18 Igster
01:04 ed
00:48 Phil Fraering
00:25 rex
23:49 Edward Yee
23:29 Phil B
23:25 Phil B
23:17 smn
23:08 Super Hose
23:08 .com
23:04 smn
23:02 Atomic Conspiracy
23:02 Super Hose
22:59 smn
22:59 Lucky
22:56 Super Hose
22:54 Frank G
22:48 Super Hose
22:44 Super Hose
22:42 Frank G