[...] 296 Iraqis died from violence last month; in October it was 238. Part of the rise in violence was related to the attempt by those who were not happy with the SOFA. [...]

Like or Dislike: 0  0

[...] 296 Iraqis died from violence last month; in October it was 238. Part of the rise in violence was related to the attempt by those who were not happy with the SOFA. [...]

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I sincerely “hope” that your analysis is more on target than mine, Mata — but I will caution you that the differences among Sunnis, Shiites, and Kurds are in no way comparable to those between Democrats and Republicans; more along the lines and at the intensity levels of Abolitionists and States-Righters in 1860 America: And you know how that panned out, despite all the democracy in action we could throw at it.

Pleasure talkin’ with you … maybe we’ll do it again when things get a little clearer over there …

Like or Dislike: 0  0

clikdawg, I can’t say as we disagree an iota here. No… I don’t expect their bipartisanship to “last” no more than I expect our Congress to stay high on the Obama rise to power.

But… instead of gridlock and no agreement, they pounded their way thru the SOFA prior to the UN mandate deadline, and came up with a substantial majority to an agreement that will… no doubt… morph into something else long before 2012.

They will never accomplish burying of ethnic/religious hatchets anymore than our Congress will reconcile the differences between conservative v liberal/progressive/socialist. This disagreement is the natural of a form of democracy in action. (or in our case, a republic in action, using democracy in our elective bodies).

I don’t expect them to become “one” in any religious, or other belief. What I expect them to do is learn to live with the dissent, and still get business done. And, at this point, it appears they have done just that. Leaving the future Obama’factor out of this, I have to celebrate a step of difficult reconciliation for a fledgling country here. And there will be many more.

As for your idea that Obama will become everything he has promised *not* to…. I’m “hoping” for that. But I suspect his deviation from his true desire of socialism is only thwarted by financial realities, and how much worse our economy can be with another 911 on his watch.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Mata –

Trouble with that Iraqi “bipartisanship” is that it can’t be expected to last (and before I continue please be assured that I fall into neither the Bush nor Obama camps; I just analyze — up to y’all what to do with the information … including ignoring it).

Such cooperation as we’re witnessing is the result of anti-occupation sentiment; their government has to at least look like they’re doing something to put an end-date on US presence, or risk losing any claim to non-puppet legitimacy it has left with the general, long-put-upon population.

Not that different from our own Congress, if you stop and think about it a moment.

It’s politics raised to the nth power — the internal stresses on an occupied nation with severe and unresolved social divides are literally incomprehensible to us — and any side agreements reached among the various parties in order to get that legitimacy-saving pact passed will be null and void once the heat is off.

They have not negotiated anything like a true burying of ethnic/religious hatchets; just shoved ‘em under the rug for awhile to chill Joe Baghdad and buy themselves some time — and the resulting very tenuous coalition can be and will be easily exploited by AQ, the Sadrists, and, yes, the US too.

To all appearances, the present government wouldn’t survive a US departure long enough to even shout “Help!” — as you note, it’ll be katie-bar-the-door when we so much as withdraw from the cities; a long-delayed civil war to determine just exactly who over there has the military, moral, and social strength and cohesion to control just exactly how much of the “New Iraq”.

Very much like our own Civil War.

I personally don’t believe they are going to be given that opportunity, by either American party or the leaders thereof — and that includes Barack Obama, who will do what he is told just like all recent American Presidents. On the purely commercial level alone, the Occupation is a rip-roaring financial success for extremely powerful US business interests, who are not going to abandon that cash-cow just ’cause Mr. Obama gives ‘em a speech … and the commercial level is only one aspect of the forces arrayed against withdrawal.

And I just don’t read that much resistance into the guy. He’s basically a salesman who has been very successfully selling the “Barack Obama!” product — and he will now be told by the status quo just exactly what he will be selling for the next four years.

It’s an open question whether the American public will continue to buy it …

Like or Dislike: 0  0

US coalition forces will be leaving the urban areas by June 2009, with complete withdrawal by Jan 2012.

Hmm, so in sixteen months, it will be 2012?

Gee, looks like a lot of progress has been made. Who didn’t see it coming? *cough* More to the point, who didn’t want to see it coming? *cough, cough*

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Jan, do you have a reading problem? The headline says…

Did I anywhere say it was a “done deal”? And quite frankly, if the US coalition troops leave the cities, and foreign fighters and rebels fill the ranks in their wake, the Iraqis will be the first to request diverting from the SOFA and requesting help to combat the elements.

But no….. As usual, any progress by the Iraqis is poo poohed as not enough or too late by those of your mentality. I guess the only things you are willing to celebrate as good news is something that demeans the other side of America that you don’t agree with.

Your camp has been saying it wouldn’t get this far. No… let me correct, that. Your camp has been *hoping* it *wouldn’t* get this far so you could find another way to bash Bush and glorify Obama. And the President elect – on his summer photo op tour – attempted to get the Iraqis to postpone signing this agreement until a new POTUS took office.

Give it a try…. give a hooo ya for Iraqi progress. Trust me, a small applause track won’t hurt all that much. And frankly, they’ve demonstrated more “bipartisan” unity in this SOFA than our Congress has in almost a decade.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

…Not so fast.

Expect the left spin machine to go into full gear, attempting to lay this accomplishment at the feet of their President-elect.

Nope. Don’t expect that.

You forgot this part:

(SFGate) In the dealmaking that preceded the vote, Iraq’s ruling Shiite bloc agreed to a Sunni demand that the pact be put to a referendum by July 30, meaning the deal could be rejected next year if, for example, anti-U.S. anger builds and demands for an immediate withdrawal grow. By that time, however, U.S. troops will likely have left urban areas and will be a less intrusive presence.

AFT adds a bit more:

The vote came after a flurry of last-minute negotiations in which the main Sunni parties secured a package of political reforms from the government and a commitment to hold a referendum on the pact in the middle of next year.

Should the Iraqi government decide to cancel the pact after the referendum it would have to give Washington one year’s notice, meaning that troops would be allowed to remain in the country only until the middle of 2010.

Expect this from the left:

The agreement is conditional, conditional upon national passage in a national referendum; it has one more hurdle to overcome before it’s a done deal.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Interesting that their Parliament had to ratify the agreement, but our Congress (specifically, the Senate, as called for in the Constitution) did not; apparently they consider it to be a treaty, while we consider it to be some sort of non-binding resolution.

Plenty of wiggle room there … both for leaving early (don’t count on it) and for staying longer.

Nut-crunching time comes, of course (assuming the agreement lasts that long), during the six months after US troops withdraw from the cities — if the place goes up in flames at that point we won’t be going anywhere; we will be imposing Biden’s partition plan “for their own good”.

Bottom line: We invaded (all other considerations aside) to establish a permanent military presence in the region, and we will do that one way or another; if Iraq shows signs of an internal stability strong enough to survive our withdrawal, we will not waste much time re-destabilizing it (see recent arms delivery to the Kurds).

Obama’s just there to put a smiley face on the whole thing …

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Hmmm… the Iraqis want us to stay??? Has anyone informed the “news” media? Do Democrats in Congress know? Has someone gone to the gym and told his highness Lord Obama?

Like or Dislike: 0  0