A while back, Al-Maliki basically subtly endorsed the Obama position on troop withdrawal. At the time, both the White House and McCain said that he was talking about withdrawal based on conditions on the ground, and more open-ended "time horizons". Today, a Al-Maliki aide stomped all over both of those ideas: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26391358/ Al-Maliki seems impatient with U.S. on troops Iraqi PM says deal must include ‘specific deadline’ for withdrawal BAGHDAD - Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said Monday no security agreement with the United States could be reached unless it included a "specific deadline" for the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq. Last week, U.S. and Iraqi officials said the two sides had agreed tentatively to a schedule which included a broad pullout of combat forces by the end of 2011 with a residual U.S. force remaining behind to continue training and advising the Iraqi security forces. Those officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the text had not been approved by either government. But al-Maliki's remarks Monday suggested that the Iraqi government is still not satisfied with that arrangement. "There can be no treaty or agreement except on the basis of Iraq's full sovereignty," al-Maliki told a gathering of tribal sheiks. He said such an agreement must be based on the principle that "no foreign soldier remains in Iraq after a specific deadline, not an open time frame." President Bush has long resisted a timetable for pulling out troops from Iraq, even under heavy pressure from a nation distressed by American deaths and discouraged by the length of the war that began in 2003. But that has somewhat softened recently, with the Bush administration now speaking about "time horizons." But even "time horizons" now appears unacceptable to al-Maliki's government. "We find this to be too vague," a close al-Maliki aide told The Associated Press on Monday. "We don't want the phrase 'time horizons.' We are not comfortable with that phrase," said the aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the ongoing negotiations. Another top al-Maliki aide, also speaking on condition of anonymity for the same reason, said the Iraqi government has "stopped talking about the withdrawal of combat troops. We just talk about withdrawals," including trainers and logistics troops. In his Monday address, al-Maliki also suggested that the question of granting immunity to U.S. military personnel or contractors continued to be a sticking point in the negotiations. In one key part of the draft agreement, private U.S. contractors would be subject to Iraqi law but the Americans are holding firm that U.S. troops would remain subject exclusively to U.S. legal jurisdiction. Al-Maliki said Monday that his country could not grant "open immunity" to Iraqis or foreigners because that would be tantamount to a violating the "sanctity of Iraqi blood." He did not elaborate. Another al-Maliki aide, speaking on condition of anonymity also because of the sensitivity of the subject, said Iraq remained adamant that the last American soldier must leave Iraq by the end of 2011 — regardless of conditions at the time. The agreement had been scheduled to be concluded by the end of last month. No new date has been set, but the two al-Maliki aides said a final draft was now available to the political leaderships in Baghdad and Washington. One of the two said a breakthrough was not expected before next month.
Agree To Disagree? Maliki, Bush Admin Clash On Status Of Pullout Agreement Some interesting news broke today that has been buried amid the orgy of convention coverage: Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki said -- apparently in a speech to tribal leaders in the Green Zone -- that the U.S. and Iraq had agreed that all "foreign soldiers" would leave Iraq by the end of 2011. Maliki was promptly shot down by the White House, which maintained there is no pullout date. http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/08/maliki_bush_admin_clash_on_pullout.php
the bush administration is probably waiting for the very last day to sign the agreement. then they can break out the mission accomplished banner again
we are there against the iraqi people wishes so yes that makes us tyrannical occupiers just like saddam who used his guns to force people to accept him we are using our guns to force iraqis to accept our soldiers running through their streets and knoking down doors and attracting jihadis its a self fulfilling profesy as long as we are on there land when a democracy elected leader cant get the american occupiers out of his country that makes us occupiers not freedom lovers and only a blind american will think otherwise
The U.S will never leave Iraq now, too much has been invested and too much progress has been made. Having a base in the heart of the middle east was a military plan, rebuilding and establishing a relationship is vital, it's about long term, unfortunately the public in the U.S doesn't see beyond NOW. It's time to use their oil revenue surplus to good use.......
