U.S. transfers sovereignty to Iraqi government ahead of schedule Reuters News Service RESOURCES BAGHDAD, Iraq -- The U.S.-led coalition transferred sovereignty to an interim Iraqi government today, speeding up the move by two days in an apparent bid to surprise insurgents who may have tried to sabotage the step toward self rule. Legal documents handing over sovereignty were handed over by U.S. governor L. Paul Bremer to interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi in a ceremony in the heavily guarded Green Zone. "This is a historical day," Allawi said during the ceremony. "We feel we are capable of controlling the security situation." Bremer will leave Iraq sometime today, coalition officials said on condition of anonymity. The ceremony took place in a formal room with Louis XIV furniture. Bremer sat on the couch with Allawi and President Ghazi al-Yawer. "We'd like to express our thanks to the coalition," al-Yawer said. "There is no way to turn back now." In Istanbul, Turkey, where President Bush and other leaders were attending a NATO summit, the U.S. administration said it was pleased by the early transfer and said it was a proud day for the Iraqi people. "You have said, and we agreed, that you are ready for sovereignty," Bremer said in the ceremony. "I will leave Iraq confident in its future." Allawi said he requested that the sovereignty be transferred earlier, reflecting a preference to have Iraqis control their own destiny as soon as possible. Last Thursday, the coalition transferred the final 11 of the 26 government ministries to full Iraqi control, meaning Iraqis were already handling the day to day operations of the interim administration. Bremer went on a series of farewell visits to areas throughout the country over the past few days. With the transfer, the Iraqis now face the daunting task of securing law and order with the help of about 135,000 U.S. troops and about 20,000 more from other coalition countries. "We have been laying down strategies for protecting our people," Allawi said after the ceremony, adding that he would spell out details at a news conference later. "The blood that has been spilled in Iraq has been spilled for a very good reason," Allawi said, explaining that it was in the cause of democracy and freedom. http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/printstory.mpl/topstory/2650758 http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,123961,00.html http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/06/28/iraq.handover/index.html
Sounds like a good idea. There has been so much terrorist activity going on over the last week or so I think it was likely they were planning to have a huge showing on the 30th. Honestly i don't know if this changes anything but the burden or responsibility gets shifted away from the US. One question I have to you think the tactics being used in Iraq will change much now? Specifically since the US isn't in charge can the Iraqis (with the military support of the US) become more aggressive in hunting down the terorists.
Let's see...."sovereignty" has been handed over to an appointed government whose Prime Minister is a former CIA operative. Can you say "Manuel Noriega" children? I thought you could!
I wish this could be like a party where we hand the key master duties over to the Iraqis and turn and say "Thanks, we're just gonna take our boys and go now..."
This is a great day on the war on terror...we have completed phase 2 of our goals in Iraq, and now the possibilities and hope for the future of Iraq with elections will be assured...This is a great day for Bush as realized from voters...but the greatness lies with the people of Iraq and how the shining future is no longer a doubt, but a realistic and direct offering... A new governmental process of a nation is now conceived, and I'm so proud of our troops, the people and our great President for enabling this day to happen! NATO will now train Iraqi troops, and the internationalized support is practically complete as we have hoped for from the inception...
I believe that it's another of those "same name, wrong guy" sort of things. But if they did have him great!
Just like a terrorist attack coordintated by Iraq and Al Qaeda before the war that killed thousands of people would've been like Christmas to the conservatives.
Implied in that statement is that Conservatives would gain a political advantage from such an occurance. A similar refrain has been sounded in virtually every development in the WOT and yet Dems are accused of politicizing? I might add that I consider it a great danger to look at events that influence the world solely through the prism of domestic politics. No Liberal, no Democrat, no conservative, no Republican, no rational Iraqi, no citizen of the World wants Zarq running around beheading people. If he's caught, we should all breathe a little easier... for a minute or two... then it's back to work. One of the criticisms that Liberals do aim at this administration is the fascination with the individual rather then than the cause. Saddam and Saddam's sons were behind the resistance, Zarq is causing our recent troubles, if we just get OBL things will be better, etc. This administration is way too concerned with the tactics and has never developed a strategy to fighting the WOT (unless hoping that things work out OK is a strategy). Perceived short term domestic political advantages, such as reflected in the above post only reinforce this preference and probably delay the realization that a complete rethinking of how we are going about this needs to take place.
Needling people is one thing, but it's really bullsh-t of you to imply that "liberals" sympathize with a murderous thug like that. Are you referring to the anti war, anti-bush family of Nicolas Berg when you say stuff like that? They're liberal I guess because they denouced the war, of course, Zarqawi cut their sons head off on worldwide TV, is it bad news for them? I understand that you're making a point lately of trying to be provocative by making silly posts, but just stop, there's enough provocation around here already. Yup.
