Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
Research Chemical SciencesUGFREAKeudomestic
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsResearch Chemical SciencesUGFREAKeudomestic

Iraqis say GTFO

Razorguns

Well-known member
Hey America.

You just borrowed $1T, sacrified thousands of young lives, made Iraq into a democracy - and now they're using it to tell you to GTFO!

And "take your damn WMDs with you!"

:)

r
--

Iraq Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki demands US withdrawal timetable

James Hider in Baghdad

Iraq said for the first time yesterday that it wanted to set a timetable for the withdrawal of US troops from its territory.

President Bush has long resisted a schedule for pulling his 145,000 soldiers out, arguing that it would play into the hands of insurgents. Nouri al-Maliki, the Shia Prime Minister, who boasted last week that he had crushed terrorism in the country, suggested that it was time to start setting time-lines.

“The current trend is to reach an agreement on a memorandum of understanding either for the departure of the forces or to put a timetable on their withdrawal,” Mr al-Maliki said during a visit to the United Arab Emirates. He rejected efforts by Mr Bush to hurry through an agreement on vital issues such as the immunity of US troops in Iraq and use of the country’s airspace. Mr Bush had hoped to sign a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) by the end of July to establish the basis for a long-term presence of US troops in the country.

The Iraqi parliament has bridled at pushing through such a binding deal with the outgoing and unpopular Bush Administration, saying that the negotiations have been secretive and could undermine Iraq’s sovereignty. “I don’t know anything about this agreement and neither does parliament,” said Ezzedine Dawla, a Sunni MP. “We’re going to pass something we don’t know anything about.”

Mr al-Maliki’s announcement showed a growing self-confidence that Iraqi leaders can stand up to their powerful ally. His oil minister said last week that leading Western oil companies would not be allowed to set conditions for future deals over Iraq’s main natural resource. The tough stance also comes before Iraqi provincial elections later this year, and may mark the start of the Prime Minister’s campaign to be reelected. His popularity was bolstered by military operations to take back the southern oil city of Basra and the town of al-Amarah from Iranian-backed Shia militias.

His comments may also hint at future cooperation with Barak Obama, the Democratic candidate, who has promised to pull US troops out of Iraq within 16 months, although Mr Obama has since appeared to waver on the commitment.

“The negotiations are continuing with the American side,” Mr al-Maliki said, reflecting the desire of many MPs to wait until a new administration is in the White House, and Iraq’s provincial elections are over, before making any deal. The agreement would govern such issues as immunity for US troops from prosecution, the use of Iraqi airspace, and which side takes operational control for military missions against insurgents.

Mahmoud Othman, a Kurdish MP, said that the issue of immunity for US forces had become a particularly sensitive subject for Iraqis. “We have suffered so much from immunity. Immunity equals committing crimes. In the name of immunity they have killed people, they have their own prisons, they captured Iraqis. We can’t continue like this,” he said.

Haidar al-Abadi, a close aide to the Prime Minister, said that the US had wanted complete control of Iraqi airspace, since Iraq still had no air force. Mr al-Abadi said that the Government had rejected the demand. “Air-space will be decided by the Iraqi Government,” he said.

In a rebuff to the Mr al-Maliki the Pentagon said any timetable would be articifical and withdrawal would depend on conditions on the ground.
 
it'd be pretty funny if we just pulled out now and said "ok, your problem" and the militants just overran the city.

of course that'd never happen because of all that's been invested, but lets see those fucks deal with the threat on their own
 
calveless wonder said:
it'd be pretty funny if we just pulled out now and said "ok, your problem" and the militants just overran the city.

of course that'd never happen because of all that's been invested, but lets see those fucks deal with the threat on their own


actually that could be the solution. there isn't a country out there that appreciates or can embrace democracy unless they have fought for it themselves.

why should they die for a gift of democracy they don't even half ass act like they want? oh they said they did in the beginning, but what they really wanted was nothing but a power change so they could run the country themselves.

give them a year, they'll be pulling the same shit as saddam was.
 
Yes, that trillion dollars could have been better spent. Just look at your currency now, and there may be worse to come.






b0und (and what about Osama, I keep asking)
 
AAP said:
actually that could be the solution. there isn't a country out there that appreciates or can embrace democracy unless they have fought for it themselves.

why should they die for a gift of democracy they don't even half ass act like they want? oh they said they did in the beginning, but what they really wanted was nothing but a power change so they could run the country themselves.

give them a year, they'll be pulling the same shit as saddam was.

I agree that it would really be the best thing but for other reasons. The Sunni's are the people we want running that country as they are the ene,ies of Iran. Enemy of my Enemy is my friend.

Bush just had a hard-on for Sudham and rushed in there with out thinking through the consequences.
 
one positive

at least know we can WASTE billions of dollars of weapons and killing over the long haul

so next time some ass fag Republican cry's the blues about helping college kids with Tuition or inner sity youth with books or the Poor with Medical, I will tell them to GTFO of my face
 
gjohnson5 said:
We're not leaving Iraq.
If (and I say IF loosely) we are attacking Iran , it makes no sense to leave any time soon

+1

Gota keep Iraq as a nice little staging area for kicking off WW3.
 
AAP said:
actually that could be the solution. there isn't a country out there that appreciates or can embrace democracy unless they have fought for it themselves.

why should they die for a gift of democracy they don't even half ass act like they want? oh they said they did in the beginning, but what they really wanted was nothing but a power change so they could run the country themselves.

give them a year, they'll be pulling the same shit as saddam was.

OMG I agree with you.

I think I should get a CAT scan, just in case.
 
b0und said:
Yes, that trillion dollars could have been better spent. Just look at your currency now, and there may be worse to come.






b0und (and what about Osama, I keep asking)


Better spent on what?
 
Top Bottom