Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Iraqis may offer US deal to stay longer
Assoc Press ^

Posted on 11/26/2007 6:52:14 AM PST by SoldierMedic

BAGHDAD -- Iraq's government is prepared to offer the U.S. a long-term troop presence in Iraq and preferential treatment for American investments in return for an American guarantee of long-term security including defense against internal coups, The Associated Press learned Monday.

The proposal, described to the AP by two senior officials familiar with the issue, is one of the first indications that the United States and Iraq are beginning to explore what their relationship might look like, once the U.S. significantly draws down its troop presence.

The Iraqi officials said that under the proposed formula, Iraq would get full responsibility for internal security and American troops would relocate to bases outside the cities. Iraqi officials foresee a long-term presence of about 50,000 U.S. troops, down from the current figure of over 160,000.

(Excerpt) Read more at seattlepi.nwsource.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: iraq
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-37 last
To: goldstategop
There have been countries to ask us to leave, and we have left graciously. We left Panama, we left the Philippines, we left France.

We are still in Japan, South Korea, Germany, Italy, and the UK.

Alright, so there is one country that asked us to leave, and we gave a big “NO” to: Cuba.

21 posted on 11/26/2007 7:22:12 AM PST by Anitius Severinus Boethius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
I like it. We're still in Germany, Japan and South Korea.

True enough but you haven't asked yourself the key question: Will George Soros think it's a good idea. Will Ron Paul? I think they won't and the libs position will simply be that messing around in Iraq was a bad idea and we need to get out 100%.

22 posted on 11/26/2007 7:22:53 AM PST by InterceptPoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
After awhile, no one thinks of it as an occupation and no country has ever asked us to leave...

Actually the Philippines did and now they are begging for us to come back.

23 posted on 11/26/2007 7:26:14 AM PST by CMAC51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SoldierMedic

Works for me! Works for them.


24 posted on 11/26/2007 7:26:16 AM PST by Redleg Duke ("All gave some, and some gave all!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

But the hard core reality is, if progress keeps happening from the grass roots up, The present “Iraqi Government” is going to be bypassed and made a laughingstock in even the eyes of their own “tribes”, if they don’t get off their “no” saying butts,and start making things work for the Iraqi people. They will “no do” themselves, right ourt of any power they think they have right now. New elections can send them right back where they came from, in disgrace.


25 posted on 11/26/2007 7:26:47 AM PST by DGHoodini (The Dems no longer have the humanity to grasp that there are things worth dying for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

This proposal is interesting. I view it as stability + protecting Iraq from Iran. Locating the US bases outside of the cities would be more to do with a confrontation with Iran than Iraq stabilization. So we’d be a double positive to them for stabilization and protection. As for us leaving well I believe the Phillipines asked us to leave -and we did so it’s not without precedent.


26 posted on 11/26/2007 7:36:42 AM PST by Justa (Politically Correct is morally wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SoldierMedic
The Iraqi officials said that under the proposed formula, Iraq would get full responsibility for internal security and American troops would relocate to bases outside the cities.

That sounds like a good deal and one that all parties will probably agree to.
27 posted on 11/26/2007 7:36:55 AM PST by P-40 (Al Qaeda was working in Iraq. They were just undocumented.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
We were in Germany, Japan, and Korea for 50 years because of the Soviet Union and no other reason. We were not there to protect the local populace from their government. If that is our purpose in remaining in Iraq then sooner or later we're going to be caught between the two.

I don't think that protecting the local populace from their government is why we will stay in Iraq. We'll be in Iraq because Iran is right next door. Iran is the THE PROBLEM in the Middle East and if we want to contain the spread of the "Religion of Peace" with it's death squads of Jihad-warriors then we are going to have to contain Iran. 50,000 troops and air bases in Iraq would be a good start. Pull them out of Europe where they are not needed and send them to Iraq.

28 posted on 11/26/2007 7:36:59 AM PST by InterceptPoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SoldierMedic
From Oct. 24th, 2007 posting:
"Most heartening, [Major General Rick] Lynch said, was the checkpoint just across the road and over an irrigation canal. It was run by Shi'ites.

Lynch said the checkpoints on opposite sides of the road highlighted a kind of reconciliation by necessity: not fighting each other but protecting themselves from a common enemy.

"They have to be convinced that we're not leaving. That's the issue. If they were to think we're leaving we'd have also sorts of trouble," Lynch said, clambering over a makeshift earthen bridge across the canal."

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1915499/posts

29 posted on 11/26/2007 7:39:53 AM PST by LZ_Bayonet (There's Always Something.............And there's always something worse!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoldierMedic
In the third paragraph it states that "American troops would relocate to bases outside the cities"

Keep in mind that the Brits have already relocated outside of Basra.

This is not a new plan. Perhaps you have heard the Hillary campaign triangulating on troop levels in Iraq.

30 posted on 11/26/2007 7:42:22 AM PST by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: P-40

Agreed. It seems like a good compromise, even for American political parties.

We stay in Iraq, but there is also a huge troop drawdown. It doesn’t sound like soldiers will be patrolling streets, but will provide external security for Iraq.


31 posted on 11/26/2007 7:49:40 AM PST by SoldierMedic (Rowan Walter, 23 Feb 2007 Ramadi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: SoldierMedic
The Iraqi officials said that under the proposed formula, Iraq would get full responsibility for internal security and U.S. troops would relocate to bases outside the cities. Iraqi officials foresee a long-term presence of about 50,000 U.S. troops, down from the current figure of more than 160,000.

Great idea. And Iraq oil $$$ can pay for it.

32 posted on 11/26/2007 8:03:17 AM PST by Donald Rumsfeld Fan (NY Times: "fake but accurate")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoldierMedic

Great way to bring on the new year. Awesome news..


33 posted on 11/26/2007 8:47:15 AM PST by Fred (The Democrat Party is the Nadir of Nilhilism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint
I don't think that protecting the local populace from their government is why we will stay in Iraq.

Judging from the article that seems to be a big part in why they want us to stay.

34 posted on 11/26/2007 9:45:54 AM PST by Non-Sequitur (Save Fredericksburg. Support CVBT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: SoldierMedic

DEAL?


35 posted on 11/26/2007 2:57:07 PM PST by JewishRighter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LZ_Bayonet
"They have to be convinced that we're not leaving. That's the issue. If they were to think we're leaving we'd have also sorts of trouble,"[General] Lynch said,
. . . and where would they get the idea that we might leave?

Harry Reid types have claimed that predicting that America would lose in Iraq did not reduce our chances of success there; there is a simple way for them to put their money where their mouth is. Republicans should demand that any Democrat who makes that claim back it up by being willing to announce that the Democrats are going to lose the next election.


36 posted on 11/26/2007 9:12:40 PM PST by conservatism_IS_compassion (The idea around which liberalism coheres is that NOTHING actually matters except PR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: JewishRighter; SoldierMedic
Deal ....yes:

U.S. and Iraq to negotiate pact on long-term relations

*************************************EXCERPT***********************

The "Declaration of Principles" signed Monday via video link by President George W. Bush and the Iraqi prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, does not specify the eventual number of American troops nor the length of their deployment.

37 posted on 11/26/2007 11:16:24 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (No Burkas for my Grandaughters!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-37 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson