Does Iraq "Power Transfer" Mean Anything?

S

shnook65

Guest
Just what good is a phoney transfer of power in an escalting war-zone; how can you have a government? Either put in more troops to calm the crap down, or get the hell outta there entirely!

no URLs for advertising allowed.
 
Originally posted by shnook65
Just what good is a phoney transfer of power in an escalting war-zone; how can you have a government? Either put in more troops to calm the crap down, or get the hell outta there entirely!

no URLs for advertising allowed.

I know shnook's been banned, but here you go:

First, the generals in charge of Iraq have already said that 115K troops was sufficient for the mission. Bush is keeping 138K troops in the region (as outlined in his War College speech) - 23,000 more than the military is requesting.
Secondly, the transfer of power is a real thing. The American/Iraqi Provisional Council is out; the Iraqi government is in. This is no small thing. And American troops will still be there to provide security for Iraq until the new Iraqi army can do it on its own.
 
Originally posted by gop_jeff
I know shnook's been banned, but here you go:

First, the generals in charge of Iraq have already said that 115K troops was sufficient for the mission. Bush is keeping 138K troops in the region (as outlined in his War College speech) - 23,000 more than the military is requesting.
Secondly, the transfer of power is a real thing. The American/Iraqi Provisional Council is out; the Iraqi government is in. This is no small thing. And American troops will still be there to provide security for Iraq until the new Iraqi army can do it on its own.

Couldn't have said it better.

I've got a question... doyou think if the government asked the U.S. to leave on July 1st, would we? I know we've declared our intention to do so, but it's also clear the government would have much to lose by sending us away.


But hypothetically, what if they did so, and perhaps invited in FRANCE!?!
 
Originally posted by Comrade
Couldn't have said it better.

I've got a question... doyou think if the government asked the U.S. to leave on July 1st, would we? I know we've declared our intention to do so, but it's also clear the government would have much to lose by sending us away.


But hypothetically, what if they did so, and perhaps invited in FRANCE!?!

I think that, if asked, we would start leaving on July 2nd. We probably wouldn't be totally gone for a couple of months, but we'd leave. Meanwhile, however, the Iraqis would be very aware that there are lots of people wanting their government to FALL, so they would be very unwise to make that choice, and therefore, I don't think they will do it.
If Iraq wants to ally with France in the future, more power to them. France can deal with Iraq's problems, if they're such a great world power.
 
Originally posted by gop_jeff
I think that, if asked, we would start leaving on July 2nd. We probably wouldn't be totally gone for a couple of months, but we'd leave. Meanwhile, however, the Iraqis would be very aware that there are lots of people wanting their government to FALL, so they would be very unwise to make that choice, and therefore, I don't think they will do it.
If Iraq wants to ally with France in the future, more power to them. France can deal with Iraq's problems, if they're such a great world power.


Which leads me to the next question, would the US have publically stated they would indeed leave if the government did not obviously rely upon us for security?
 
Originally posted by Comrade
Which leads me to the next question, would the US have publically stated they would indeed leave if the government did not obviously rely upon us for security?

I think it was more of a show of respect of the sovreignity of the Iraqi government, using an extreme example, to show that we will respect their wishes just as we respect the wishes of other governments in which our troops are based.
 

Forum List

Back
Top