|
|
May 24, 2013
|
|
|
|
 No, Thank You—Don’t Come AgainPosted on Sep 11, 2011
Moqtada al-Sadr, who is either the sharpest thorn in the side of U.S. forces in Iraq or the linchpin of an Iraqi parliament frequently on the verge of coming apart—or both—has ordered his followers not to attack U.S. troops in order to make sure the occupiers leave as quickly as possible. The U.S. military is officially unwelcome in Iraq after Dec. 31, but there are negotiations aimed at allowing some troops to remain for an additional period. If that happens, al-Sadr says his “military operations will be resumed in a new and tougher way.”
Advertisement Previous item: Video Game Companies Cash In on Tax Tokens Next item: Concern in New Egypt as Police Raid Al-Jazeera New and Improved CommentsIf you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy. |
After Oklahoma Disaster, Give Thanks to Government
 . '/' . substr('9781859843604',-6,3) . '/' . '9781859843604' . '.jpg'; ?>)
Email 
Print
Share
Email to a friend
Newsletter 
Like Us
Follow Us
Get Our Feed
Tags|Bazaar|Podcast|About Us|Contact Us|User Agreement|Privacy Policy|FAQ: Comments and Moderation | Google+
© 2013 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.
By drbhelthi, September 12, 2011 at 11:22 am Link to this comment
“Last month, Iraqi leaders began negotiating with US officials to keep at least several thousand troops in Iraq to continue training the nation’s shaky security forces.”
Please support this statement with a citation by reps. of Moqtada al-Sadr - - .
The message of Moqtada al-Sadr does not obtain parity with the idea of Iraqi officials negotiating to keep >at least< several thousand US troops to train Iraqi security forces. However, that US officials are finagling to keep a large footprint in Iraq makes more sense. Like, maybe not 45,000, but rather, a huge reduction, down to only 40,000 ? Then, what about the 50,000 US operatives and US civilian employees, plus embassy staff ? Do they also get to remain?
Report thisBy tolstoy, September 12, 2011 at 9:20 am Link to this comment
Clearly, the US wants to keep a foothold in Iraq as part of its “garrison the globe” overall policy. This is a mistake, unless we want another war in Iraq. Al Sadr must not be underestimated. He commands an enormous army which was largely responsible—by NOT becoming involved militarily—for the success of the so-called “surge” acclaimed by Bush some years back. We should get out and let Iraq deal with its own problems. Note how slanted this AP article is to keeping US troops on hand. Wider analysis is needed on whether Iraq can deal with its security issues, other than from the POV of the biased Kurds. But US “garrisoning the globe” policy will determine what happens. Continued war, continued war policies of the last 10 years likely.
Report this