Having won, now there's a timetable for us to leave.
BAGHDAD – Iraq's parliament approved Thursday a security pact with the United States that lets American troops stay in the country for three more years — setting a clear timetable for a U.S. exit for the first time since the 2003 invasion.
Well, not exactly.
The Shiite bloc agreed to a Sunni demand that the pact be put to a referendum by July 30, meaning the deal must undergo an additional hurdle next year.Our troops will be there until 2012 under this agreement. 2012. All you Americans who wanted them to come home under fire without having completed their mission, look at that date. 2012. Nine years. I've read that it usually takes about 10 years to quell an insurgency, so this sounds good.
Will a President Obama be able to keep his campaign promise of "a brigade a month" if the Iraqis approve this pact? Does President-elect Obama even know how big a brigade is?
I don't foresee helicopters on the embassy roof this time.
5 comments:
I don't see Obama using his plan if this one passes. Why should he? He's got an agreement with the Iraqi government to get troops out generally the same way his plan works, and he didn't even have to negotiate with anyone for it.
So, during the campaign Palin was right to say that a timetable was equivalent to surrender? But now, when Bush's team negotiate one, it is OK?
The way Obama wanted a timetable, it was surrender. We're leaving on winning terms.
Sad that a Brit wouldn't recognize this. How far your people have fallen, if you're any indication.
When you run away before the job is done that's a surrender. I've been involved in one. If you leave after victory is assured you've won. Big differece, right?
Another bit of common currency during the presidential campaign, and previous to its start, were the complaints about American hegemony. Have us hegemons lost interest in the establishment of the American empire with the election of that noble being of light and mind, Barack Obama?
Post a Comment