Iraq is not Soveriegn

[Hard Driver]

One of the problems in Iraq, is that no matter all the claims, the government is not soverign, and as such, no one can support it without supporting the US occupation. Since we are hated, people won't support the government just to spite us.

Iraqi government officials concede things aren't working, but they say that's because the United States doesn't allow Iraq to really control its own destiny.

While the Iraqi government commands its own troops, it cannot send them into battle without U.S. agreement. Iraqi Special Forces answer only to U.S. officers.

"We don't have full sovereignty," said Hadi al-Amri, the chairman of parliament's Defense and Security Committee. "We don't have sovereignty over our troops, we don't have sovereignty over our provinces. We admit it."

And because of the very real prospect of Iranian infiltration, the government doesn't fund or control its own intelligence service. It's paid for and run by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency.

Abdul Qarim al-Enzi, director of the parliamentary ethics committee, asks whether it is "reasonable for a country given sovereignty by the international community to have a chief of intelligence appointed by another country."

One senior U.S. official in Baghdad told CNN that "any country with 160,000 foreigners fighting for it sacrifices some sovereignty."

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/08/22/iraq.democracy/index.html

We are WAAY too late to be making Iraq sovereign. And it may be too late to recover. But if the Iraqi people don't have faith that their government is their own, then it will never succeed.

In order to make the Iraqi people support their government, the US needs to but our noses out of it and withdraw our troops. And yes, the government will not be what we want. But there is no government in Iraq that is going to be our best buddy and be supported by the people. If we can't get along well with France, how is Iraq going to support all we do.. So for we need to accept that an Iraqi democracy is going to not be our best friend.

 

[heyjude]

It isn't going to matter anyway. Maliki is taking too long to give the US and England the rights to their oil, so Maliki is going to have to go. Bush will re-install the first American dictator, Allawi, he'll finish the oil deal, and we will go home. Except for however many troops we leave there to kill any Iraqi who dares to object to the deal. Then we can go on to attack Iran. Whoopee. Are we all having fun?

 

[top gun]

It is truly a sad state of affairs over there and the fact that when we flood the country with hundreds of thousands of heavily armed troops we can hold a lid on things here and there doesn't change the dynamic that Hard Driver clearly stated.

The Iraqi leaders we are propping up right now are corrupt and strictly partisan to there own religious groups. As far as the Iraqi soldiers & especially the police... one day they appear to be going along with the plan and the next day a large group of them in official police uniforms are shooting at American troops.

I hope the Dems get all the support in the world to help take our country back from the President and his Party that lied us into this quagmire.

 

[USMC the Almighty]

... take our country back from the President and his Party that lied us into this quagmire.

Did you copy and paste this from the DNC talking points or was it regurgitated from memory? This line is so thoroughly polluted with untruths that my head is spinning.

For starters, shouldn't you be fighting to take the "country back" from everyone who voted for the war (including your beloved 81 Dems who voted for it) or are you so partisan that you are only angry at the Republicans who authorized the war?

Secondly, if you are going to accuse the President about "lying" then you must lie the same blame on the shoulders of BJ Clinton, Hillary, Al Gore, Kerry, etc. who are all on record saying that Saddam is a threat with his WMDs and must be disarmed. There is a difference between being wrong in hinesight and lying.

Thirdly, there is no "quagmire". Iraq is steadily improving. The sheiks are switching sides now and warming up to coalition forces which is a huge step. Sadr's Madhi Army is on the run to Iran. Building democracies takes time. Freedom comes at a price and there are certainly growing pains associated with liberty. It took the U.S. nearly 20 years before it was apparent that the republic would be able to sustain itself and it wasn't really until 1815 that the U.S. secured its liberty and independence.

 

[Castle]

For starters, shouldn't you be fighting to take the "country back" from everyone who voted for the war (including your beloved 81 Dems who voted for it) or are you so partisan that you are only angry at the Republicans who authorized the war?

Secondly, if you are going to accuse the President about "lying" then you must lie the same blame on the shoulders of BJ Clinton, Hillary, Al Gore, Kerry, etc. who are all on record saying that Saddam is a threat with his WMDs and must be disarmed. There is a difference between being wrong in hinesight and lying.

Thirdly, there is no "quagmire". Iraq is steadily improving. The sheiks are switching sides now and warming up to coalition forces which is a huge step. Sadr's Madhi Army is on the run to Iran. Building democracies takes time. Freedom comes at a price and there are certainly growing pains associated with liberty. It took the U.S. nearly 20 years before it was apparent that the republic would be able to sustain itself and it wasn't really until 1815 that the U.S. secured its liberty and independence.

Unfortunately, the fifth column in the US has no desire to address these facts.

-Castle