Inside Iraq – security pact – Nov 21 – Part 2
May 1st, 2009 | by security |
After months of stalemate, painstaking negotiations, and political poker play, the US and Iraq have finally agreed on a definite date – to end the US-led occupation of Iraq by 2011.
Iraqi negotiators consider the firm withdrawal date a victory after the outgoing Bush administration had long insisted it would rely on conditions on the ground rather than be tied down to a timetable.
Senior US military officials, on the other hand, have been quoted as privately criticising US President George Bush for giving Iraq more control over American military operations for the next three years than it had contemplated.
Some critics say Bush gave in to Iraqi demands to avoid leaving the decisions to his successor, President-elect Barack Obama
However, the security agreement approved by the Iraqi Cabinet by a resounding majority last week could still be derailed by the Iraqi parliament.
But with talks of conspiracy theories and secret deals circulating in Baghdad, critics believe Iraq’s Parliament will be split further, making it even more difficult for the new security pact to be passed.
Our guests this week are Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, plus the leader of Iraq’s National Dialogue Front Saleh Al-Mutlaq and Asma Al-Musawi from the Sadrist Movement.
DARREN
9 Responses to “Inside Iraq – security pact – Nov 21 – Part 2”
By crazyitalian131 on May 1, 2009 | Reply
DALTON
um…are you retarded…
we signed a deal and i promise you we are sick of iraq….i hope once we leave the rest of you all die…so we wont have to worry about your filthy people again…
death to islam
death to all middle east
By Arfalarf on May 4, 2009 | Reply
FRANK
davisracquet, you don’t know a thing about the way human minds work. If we had bombed the **** out of every muslim capital, we would be having problems with terrorist attacks for decades. The way to win a counterterrorism war is to get the people on your side and isolate the militants. What we DON’T want to do is to provide the militants with millions of angry new recruits.
By Neiko410 on May 6, 2009 | Reply
GASTON
The soil in Iraq is contaminated with depleted uranium. As I see it it doesn’t matter who wins or when the army goes home because Iraq is doomed. Iraq will be living with birth defects for the next 50 years or more. What happened to the words “protect and serve?” Who did you protect? Me? Don’t bother…
By covertbabo on May 6, 2009 | Reply
AHMAD
And what “muslim capitals” are those? There are only Iran and Syria, and their governments don’t subscribe to the ideology of Al-Qa3ida
Iran is a Shia regime, and the Shia always villify “Wahhabis,” therefore they would be against Osama bin Laden.
And Syria is a secular Ba’ath regime, led by president Bashar Asad who is not even a muslim
By davisracquet on May 7, 2009 | Reply
ARLEN
The war in Iraq was a bad decision right from the beginning! What should have happened are airstrikes over all enemy muslim capitals beginning 1pm Sep 11, 2001 NY time! I think ten straight days and nights of relentless bombings would have been very successful in stopping future terrorist attacks. These countries should have been hit hard and the people starve to death. It would not have been the fault of the US, but rather the fault of the terrorists for doing this to their own people!
By an1792 on May 10, 2009 | Reply
ALPHONSE
It really does not matter what US does in Iraq, US has lost the war in iraq just like russions in afghanistan, the res is just …
By anthony6661 on May 11, 2009 | Reply
ALFRED
here to stay
By cutegual on May 14, 2009 | Reply
CURT
American will never leave:)will kill more ppl every day to stay in Iraq and say hat iraq is not secure and they can’t lead themselves:),, So wake up IrAQI kick out those losers(HIV) who are in your Holy land.
By americanmuslimgirl on May 16, 2009 | Reply
CHRISTIAN
Interesting. Thanks AlJazeera!