It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Iraqi PM suggest US might be asked to leave

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 11:08 PM

Iraqi PM suggest US might be asked to leave

raqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki suggested that US forces might be asked to leave if the two countries cannot agree on the new status of forces agreement, McClatchy reported Friday.

Maliki, seen above, made the comment after pressure from Shiite lawmakers who feel that Iraq’s sovereignty is threatened by US forces and after talks over the status of forces agreement “reached an impasse,” according to McClatchy.
(visit the link for the full news article)

posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 11:08 PM
But, will the US actually leave if asked to leave? I think not. The media makes it out to seem that Iraq and the US are so buddy, buddy. Let's see how this folds out
(visit the link for the full news article)

posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 11:22 PM
I can picture Bush snickering right now...There's no way they'd leave, especially now. Bush wants Iran too...and Iraq is the prime location for that. This most likely will be ignored, refused, or America will end up looking worse than it already does if it chooses to say "No we wont leave". Either way- if we leave or stay we'll be hated by all.

Iraq is basically defenseless and completely vulnerable. We've bombed them back to the stone age practically and then decided to give them "democracy".

I for one hope we do get kicked out of Iraq. We deserve to. We have no business there. And too many people have died...this war like the Vietnam war was pointless. We've destroyed the lives of too many. The cost is too high to maintain. We're destroying our own country along with Iraq.

These wars are being used as distractions. That's how bush got away with what he did because we we're all focused on the war while he had time to enact all these corrupt laws and create sadistic plans.

[edit on 6/13/2008 by PimpyMcgibbins]

posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 11:46 PM
heh, yeah right.

''Asked to leave''

Even if these talks do FAIL, its already quite clear that it matters not if the Iraqi government agree's or not

Bush administration officials have appeared before the media to make clear that—as far as the White House is concerned—the Iraqi parliament will ratify two agreements that sanction long-term military bases and the indefinite US use of Iraq’s territory and airspace.

Two frames of mind on this one,

The current talks going on allow the US & its contractors to operate outside of any Iraqi law system.
They cannot be arrested or held accountable for ANYTHING, by ANY IRAQI, even though they are in Iraq. Kinda like Poland if you ask me.
It also gives the US and its contractor's free range to do as it please FROM Iraqi territory.

Basically, the Iraqi government controls the out of control Iraqi society, while the US government controls Iraq itself, Iraq's OIL and the LAW in which the occupying force obeys.

Maliki is either sympathetic to the:

USA ( to protect his power )
IRAN ( Because he is a #te/Iran agent assisting Iran gaining control )

Either way, if he's sympathetic to the USA, then this whole charade of

'' We refuse their terms, we'll ask them to leave ''

Is simply a stage show, to TRICK the people into believing that the USA and IRAQ are actually negotiating and compromising.
Because, after all, thats what good democratic states do!
And when an agreement is reached that gives the US everything it wants anyway, the decider cant stand up and say its another momentous day for Iraq and the USA because they both overcame differences in the democratic fashion and worked out terms for each others security.

In other words, it was a crock!

Now, if he's sympathetic to Iran, surely the USA knows this by now.
With the meetings as of late in Tehran, with his control over Al Sadr, and the continuous breaches of security and leaks that stem from the Iraqi government.

This means he wil genuinely try to FORCE the US to leave, by publically stating that Iraq DOES not want the US to remain.

Its funny, who really would of thought, all that BS talk about diplomacy, and sovereignty would turn out to be the axe that killed the US occupation?
The United STATES stated very early on

[Powell: US would leave if Iraq requests
Updated: 2004-05-15 10:37

U.S.-led coalition forces would leave Iraq if a new interim government should ask them to, Secretary of State Colin Powell said Friday, but such a request is unlikely.

And now, there's a real chance they will do exactly that.
If the US Abruptly refuses their request publically, it will be very obvious to even the most stubborn war supporter, that this was NEVER about Iraqi freedom.

Even this piece below,

According to a senior Iraqi official, the negotiations between the two allies became so fraught recently that President Bush intervened personally to defuse the situation. On Thursday he telephoned Nouri al-Maliki, the Iraqi Prime Minister, to assure him that Washington was not seeking to undermine Iraq’s sovereignty and that America would reconsider any contentious part of the agreement.

Who does George REALLY beleive he's kidding?

Well the American public obviously.

On Tuesday, without note in the U.S. media, more than half of the members of Iraq's parliament rejected the continuing occupation of their country. 144 lawmakers signed onto a legislative petition calling on the United States to set a timetable for withdrawal, according to Nassar Al-Rubaie, a spokesman for the Al Sadr movement, the nationalist Shia group that sponsored the petition.

It will again fade into the backdrop.

What will dominate the news this time?


Who knows.

posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 11:49 PM
If Iraq asks us to leave... and we tell them to screw themselves... I can see bad things happening for the United States. We're already on thin ice with the whole Iraq thing - it's only the Iraqi government's willingness to keep us over there that keeps us safe in this regard.

I have a bad feeling that if they ask us to move on out and we tell them no... We'll be facing some heavy economic sanctions from a number of nations, possibly even a coalition of military forces arraying to remove us from Meopotamia - And I don't think it'll just be Arab nations on that team.

posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 12:04 AM
Problem there is, I feel the US would immediately use the N-word to discourage ANY nations in backing the Iraqi government in removing the US.

The US has no leverage over nations financially any more, because they are screwed, but i do believe if someone like.... Egypt, China etc etc actually sent troops in and HELPED iraqi forces battle Americans.. we'll, you'd basically have World war, and the nukes would fly.

The worlds going to have to face this threat one day,

Join, and defeat the USA risking possible war
Or, let them do as they please, without raising a fuss.

IS IRAQ really worth the risk?
Sad day when we have to actually ask ourselves these questions.

posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 12:04 AM
I hope they do ask us to leave. That would be great! And when they get a little genocide thrown their way we can just roll our shoulders and say "Hey, you asked us to leave buddy"

posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 12:12 AM
reply to post by Danger Girl

Who Iraqi's?

Iraqi's dont exist in that form any more.

Its Sunni and #te.

Sunni's already faced a massive genocide, theres a map floating around i cannot locate it now, but it shoes Baghdad divisions BEFORE and AFTER.

Found it

1-2 years ago during the highpoint of civil war, Sunni's were massacred and driven from baghdad, #tes rolled in.

We opened the doors for this when we entered.

Us Leaving?
Will not open genocide, it will simply CEMENT #tes in Baghdad, which they pretty much are.

Genocide occured already, and has stopped now becuase #tes have taken over.
The US is the one killing more than anything at the moment.

posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 12:17 AM
reply to post by Danger Girl

I love when ATS'ers come out in favor of genocide. It leasts me know who's not ever going to be worth the time it takes to read posts from.

posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 12:17 AM
I would love to see him ask the US to leave. Go ahead, ask us to leave. I am sure there are plenty of US troops and people back home who would love for us to get out of that hellhole.

posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 12:19 AM
I wonder if they ask us publicly to leave, how would the international community respond? Would they stand behind Iraq and say leave, or would they stand behind the U.S?

posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 01:05 AM
They have been asked to leave before. After the blackwater incident. That worked out real well for them.

posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 01:12 AM

Originally posted by jhill76Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki suggested that US forces might be asked to leave if the two countries cannot agree on the new status of forces agreement, McClatchy reported Friday.

If Maliki is considering asking the U.S. forces to leave, then I guess that means that until then Iraq must want the U.S. forces there. Therefore, contrary to what many people claim, the U.S. is not "occupying" Iraq. The U.S. is there because Iraq wants the U.S. there.

Further, this means that if Iraq currently wants the U.S. troops in Iraq, Obama's proposal to immediately begin withdrawing the troops would be a direct refusal of the Iraqi government's desire to keep the U.S. forces in Iraq. If Iraq wants the U.S forces in place to help keep order, and the U.S. withdraws these forces, why wouldn't Iraq immediately partner with Iran to help "stabilize" the situation in Iraq?

posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 01:12 AM
I hope we leave. Nothing but dirt and people killing each other. Let them rot. Bush u basturd!

posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 01:55 AM
The chance's of a real request to leave are pretty slim. At the moment the US military presence still seems to be needed. While Iraq is making progress they're still not at complete self sufficiency yet. Unless Iraq thinks that it can hold itself together on its own I doubt there will be a request to leave.

As far as long term treaty goes, they probably will try to scratch the indefinite use of territory with immunity to law. No idea how that'll go, but Iraq will definitely want to get rid of that. But I'd be willing to bet that the air bases will stay without a ton of objection. The bonus to the local economies is no doubt very tempting.

posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 02:16 AM
The US presence is THE factor for continued unrest - 5 years after destroying the country , they can`t rebuild because of all the fighting - kinda like france when they were occupied.

posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 02:42 AM
The area that is Iraq today has been the site of fighting between the Shia and Shiites for almost as long as there has been Islam. Even before Islam, Iraq had the misfortune of being a battlefield for various groups, each wanting power. The causes for fighting in the middle east are much more deeply rooted than the United States intervening, after all, they've been fighting for longer than we've been a country. I predict that Iraq will likely be the site of a lot of fighting for many years to come, with or without the US. We're just along for the ride really. However Iraq does have the chance to change all of that. If they could get their house in order for just long enough to get a proper education system built and get infrastructure for everyone, and stabilize for a generation it could lay the path for many future generations.

[edit on 6/14/2008 by cyberdude78]

posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 03:25 AM
LOL this is so funny Common guy's think about it Iraq Says in public we want you to go and the US says no!! Then you have More War MORE money money money The Government don't give a s### about the every day person who is going to take that IED in the face It's all about money END of story

[edit on 14-6-2008 by duffster]

posted on Jun, 15 2008 @ 04:27 AM
We all know that Bush would push for permanent bases, if he isn't already. The fact is, neither the Iraqi government, nor the American public have any control over what actually happens to Iraq. The sad thing is that even though we are given the illusion of control, the moment a Presidential candidate becomes president, all bets are off and any power that the public held is long gone. Getting to the presidency is merely a test of information manipulation. Look at how elections are done and anyone can see that the American public never sees the full truth. Even this forum doesn't come close to understanding what really goes on behind closed doors. While the guesswork done here can be extremely good at times, there are certain intellectual impediments that face any organization of people trying to figure out the motives of another person or group of people.

The Iraq government may not be placed into power in the same way as past governments touched by the executive office but it still follows the designs of said office. The Status of Forces agreement is basically just saying "I'm going to stay here. You cool with that?" It can allow for the placement of troops and bases in other nations. The fact that a SOFA is being mentioned at all should be more panic inducing than anything at this point as it really does mean that we will be stuck in Iraq through one way or another.

top topics


log in