Skip to comments.Iraqis may offer US deal to stay longer
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 ...
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.
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%.
Actually the Philippines did and now they are begging for us to come back.
Works for me! Works for them.
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.
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.
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.
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."
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.
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.
Great idea. And Iraq oil $$$ can pay for it.
Great way to bring on the new year. Awesome news..
Judging from the article that seems to be a big part in why they want us to stay.
"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.
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.