Can Iraqi Parliament End the Occupation?
From Yesterday’s Rose Garden press conference with President Bush (emphasis added):
Martha Raddatz, ABC News: Thank you, Mr. President. You say you want nothing short of victory, that leaving Iraq would be catastrophic; you once again mentioned al Qaeda. Does that mean that you are willing to leave American troops there, no matter what the Iraqi government does? I know this is a question we’ve asked before, but you can begin it with a “yes” or “no.”
George W. Bush, President: We are there at the invitation of the Iraqi government. This is a sovereign nation. Twelve million people went to the polls to approve a constitution. It’s their government’s choice. If they were to say, leave, we would leave.
Perhaps taking Bush at his word, the most influential political figure in Iraq, Muqtada al-Sadr, appeared at Friday prayers in Najaf and called for the withdrawal of foreign forces from Iraq.
Addressing hundreds of worshippers who gathered in Kufa mosque today at noon, Sadr urged the Iraqi government not to extend the presence of the foreign forces in Iraq even for a single day more, saying: “the government is not authorized to extend the mandate of the foreign forces in Iraq after a million people demonstrated to protest that presence and 144 lawmakers signed to demand the pullout of these forces.”
Is it really possible that the majority of Americans and a majority in both houses of Congress are powerless to force Bush to order an end to the occupation of Iraq, but a foreign government can do it?
May 25th, 2007 at 11:12 am
Since the Iraqi government can ask the US military to leave and that we would comply with their wishes, by definition, makes our presence in Iraq not an occupation.
May 25th, 2007 at 11:28 am
We would leave all that yummy oil and our brand new military bases behind? Really? How generous of us, after our billions of dollars and thousands of lives investments to have the oil and the strategic bases.
May 25th, 2007 at 12:13 pm
Ken, you are assuming that Bush isn’t lying.
May 25th, 2007 at 12:14 pm
Ken,
Your ancestors are spinning in their graves right now wondering how they could have generated such a dumbshit offspring. Maybe your parents conceived you while frolicking on the uranium pile in Moab a couple decades ago??
May 25th, 2007 at 2:07 pm
“…you are assuming that Bush isn’t lying.”
That’s it, right there. That he’s lying should be a bottom-line given.
Sadr has asked us to leave. What to make of that?
May 25th, 2007 at 2:29 pm
Moqtada, like every successful Arab politician, positions himself at the intersection of religion and nationalism. IraqSlogger today had a photo of a British soldier in Basra– behind him was the writing on the wall, literally. Translation: “Imam al-Kumaini said that God gave no authority to the infidels over Muslims, salute the Army of Imam al-Mahdi, our souls are for you oh Mahdi, our souls are for you oh Mahdi.”
“God gave no authority to the infidels over muslims”– that’s why the occupation can’t work. The Mahdi Army is Sadr’s militia (the Brits just killed the local commander in Basra).
May 27th, 2007 at 8:48 am
Infiltration of progressive media complete…, capitulation at hand, democracy OVER.
Nothing more to say but, sold down the river by the those you called your own, though I never would . Wonder what will be next in the road to nowhere. The road to the scrapheap once on it, is a Superhighway.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/may2007/nati-m26.shtml
The Nation makes excuses for dem capitulation. The party of the people is so bushs’ bitch.