Bush Says Iraqi Leaders Will Want U.S. Forces to Stay to Help -NYT

President Bush said in an interview on Thursday that he would withdraw American forces from Iraq if the new government that is elected on Sunday asked him to do so, but that he expected Iraq's first democratically elected leaders would want the troops to remain as helpers, not as occupiers.
...
In a 40-minute conversation in the Oval Office with correspondents from The New York Times, Mr. Bush, seated in front of a crackling fire, ranged across a number of issues that he is expected to discuss in his State of the Union address next week.

Yet Iraq was clearly foremost in his mind, and he said that with the coming election, "We're watching history being made, history that will change the world." That has been Mr. Bush's message in a series of interviews he has given in the days before and since his Inaugural Address on Jan. 20. .......
...
"The fundamental question also that I think a lot of Iraqis understand - and I do too - is how do we make sure the Iraqi citizens view U.S. troops as helpers, not as occupiers," he said. "To the extent that a coalition presence is viewed as an occupying force, it enables the insurgents, the radicals, to continue to impress people that the government really is not their government, and that the government is complicit in having their country occupied.

http://nytimes.com/2005/01/28/politics/28prexy.html?pagewanted=2&ei=5094&en=2734a762d6ebce2e&hp&ex=1106888400&partner=homepage

Excerpts of the interview are here
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/28/politics/28ptext.html?oref=login

snip>
A fundamental question, also, that I think a lot of Iraqis understand - and I do, too - that, you know, it is - you know, how do we make sure the Iraqi citizens view U.S. troops as helpers, not as occupiers. And to the extent that a - you know, a coalition presence is viewed as an occupying force, it enables the insurgents, the radicals, to continue to impress people that the government really is not their government and that the government is complicit in having their country occupied.
...
On whether he is willing to tell the American people that his goal of achieving permanent solvency in Social Security involves painful choices and that no one should expect to come out with everything promised to them under current law:

You're actually right when you talk about permanent - as I said yesterday, that the personal accounts do not permanently fix the system. ...

And so there's going to be some difficult choices members of Congress are going to have to make, along with the White House.

and he'll tell them what they want.

Unless there is a Iraqi Government that requests us to stay.

Just in time to invade Iran and avoid the draft.

"...would want the troops to remain as helpers, not as occupiers."


I had no idea! We are just "helpers!" Well, that SOUNDS a lot nicer, now doesn't it?

game!!! BAM oh please stay BAM sorry we hit you in the head please stay!!! BAM!!! Rock throwing is like Hello we love you in Iraqi!!!

Bush is way pushing it!!!

for decades. :evilgrin: :evilgrin: :evilgrin:

Here's a crisis that's not a crisis, but believe you me, and I mean what I say, we westerners believe in western values.

it almost :silly: funny.

That's all there is to it. He knows the new government will ask the US to stay on.

On Sunday, all eyes will be riveted on Iraq. Who will win? It's going to be exciting. (Bush makes microwave popcorn and places his bets with Laura). He stays glued to the TV to see who is the front-runner on late Sunday night.

After all, there are 7,000 contestants in this race. Who knows what the outcome will be.

***there's just one nagging question about his statement, "to the extent a coalition presence is viewed as an occupying force..."

How would we NOT be viewed as an occupying force? We are in their country. We are killing their citizens, jailing their people, abusing and humiliating them.

Maybe when we leave?

It's only going to get better. :boring:

No need for guessing; the fix is in.

There's a huge slate on the ballot, but there are two, Allawi and another, that have been reported as the ones likely to end up with the eventual leadership position.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050128/wl_mideast_afp/usiraqbush_050128115548

Bush: US will pull out if new Iraqi leaders request it

WASHINGTON (AFP) - US troops will pull out of Iraq (news - web sites) if the new leaders to be elected on Sunday requested it, President George W. Bush (news - web sites) said in an interview published by The New York Times, although he added that he expected the Iraqis to ask US troops to remain as helpers, not occupiers.


"I've heard the voices of the people that presumably will be in a position of responsibility after these elections, though you never know," Bush said.


"But it seems like most of the leadership there understands that there will be a need for coalition troops at least until Iraqis are able to fight."


He said he believed "most of the leaders that are there understand that the coalition troops are very important to helping them provide the stability necessary for people to gain confidence in their government."


Asked by the daily in its 40-minute interview, carried out on Thursday, if the US troops should be withdrawn if the new Iraqi administration requested it, Bush said: "Yes, absolutely. And this is a sovereign government -- they're on their feet."


SNIP
\
EDIT: Link to NYT article

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/28/politics/28prexy.html?hp&ex=1106974800&en=3fb476e5ad0cd03a&ei=5094&partner=homepage

we'll just tell our installed puppet NOT to make the request :eyes:

Of course the toady Iraqi government is never going to ask such a thing because they are dead meat hanging from a light post when the US pulls out.

I call Bullshit!

:freak:
dbt

since the US is controlling the election, the * regime already knows who is going to be elected.

that's why we're building military bases over there like they were Kwik-Shops® or something. :eyes:

too.

Allawi is the pre-ordained winner ... or have they made Sistani a deal he just can't refuse.

if it isn't Allawi, then what?

I guess then I'd have to pinch myself to wake from my sleep... :boring:

Formality. Even if they could, Vegas would not place odds on this pre-determined election.

A "win" by Allawi will have the Iraqis outraged...all 20 million of them...and the entire world will know beyond any shadow of a doubt that it was all a fix.

AFP: Bush: US will pull out if new Iraqi leaders request it

<snip>

"The fundamental question also that I think a lot of Iraqis understand -- and I do too -- is how do we make sure the Iraqi citizens view US troops as helpers, not as occupiers?" Bush said.


"To the extent that a coalition presence is viewed as an occupying force, it enables the insurgents, the radicals, to continue to impress people that the government really is not their government, and that the government is complicit in having their country occupied.


"I view that as reasonable," Bush added. "I also view that as pretty hopeful that there is nationalistic sentiment, that 'this is my country.' To me that's a positive sign."

.... I'm cofused here. Is he saying the resistance killing US soldiers is a GOOD thing???

Shrub has already spoken to the likely winning party?

If the al Sistani party doesn't win this it will be obvious that the election was rigged. As insane as Shrub and his Junat are, I still cannot believe that they would so stupid and arrogant that they would think that they could get away with having any assembly chose Allawi as PM.

Al Sistani will issue a Fatwa for a general uprising against the Occupation and al Sadr will call on all of the Insurgency plus the Shi'ites to rise up. Now it is estimated that there are at least 40,000 active fighters. That number could rise to 200,000 in a few weeks and the violence to date will seem mild in comparison to what could come if the Iraqis get their orders from al Sistani.

on the Diebold machines.

Seriously, my husband, who is a realist and has a dark view of things, has been saying this for months. And I have been saying, "No, if they ask us to leave, we'll leave."

I was wrong again.

By ELISABETH BUMILLER, DAVID E. SANGER and RICHARD W. STEVENSON
Published: January 28, 2005


WASHINGTON, Jan. 27 - President Bush said in an interview on Thursday that he would withdraw American forces from Iraq if the new government that is elected on Sunday asked him to do so, but that he expected Iraq's first democratically elected leaders would want the troops to remain as helpers, not as occupiers. (contd)

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/28/politics/28prexy.html?hp&ex=1106974800&en=3fb476e5ad0cd03a&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Obviously the “FIX IS IN” as everyone already knew including the Iraqi people. How many in Iraq will risk death to vote for foreign occupation or how many are as dumb as 59 millions American voters were last November?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1190448

From the New York Times. Same nonsense.

Not that anyone expected anything but twaddle, of course, on this subject. In the rythm's of Mr. Twain, there will be one sure way to tell if an Iraqi government is democratic: ask it if it wants U.S. troops to stay. If it says no, it is democratic.

Am I crazy for hoping that some radical fringe candidate somehow manages to get enough votes to win the election? I realize shrub probably has it "handled," but why do I find myself rooting for a lunatic who hates & despises the U.S.? It would be a major embarassment for this so-called administration, but would also be dangerous for the world in general. Would it be a victory for "our" side, if it results in a more dangerous Iraqi leadership than we had before?

We don't even get fair elections in the U.S.A.
I seriously doubt these so called "elections" will reflect the will of the people of Iraq.
It's just too easy to rig, especially when no one's looking.

Iraqi leadership than we had before?

NO I am not voting for that. Bu$h has enough hate for everyone now.

Germans promise to withdraw from France if Vichy government asks them to leave.


MDN

:wow: :wow: :wow:

Al Sistani's entire platform is he will DEMAND TROOPS LEAVE. He just spoke about that publicly 2 days ago!

:wow: :wow: :wow:


Oh and by the way, bush, the Iraqis are WELL READY to fight. You haven't noticed, but currently they're kicking our fucking asses.

Sistani will NOT ACCEPT Bush pulling this. If Bush thinks he will get away with rigging their elections he is a bigger fool than i thought. On Sistani's order the level of horror in that country against US will rise to terrifying levels. God i detest Bush.

The only Iraqis that would want them to stay are the U.S. sycophants. Guess we know who'll be winning the "election."

What the rest of the world already knows about, and the US StenoMedia won't tell you:

"This is a statement issued and signed by 69 independent political groups, religious authorities ( marjyia ), tribal leaders and independent public figures," Mothana Hareth Al-Dari, spokesman for the influential Sunni Muslim Cleric's Association (MCA) said.

The statement advocated an "absolute boycott" of the elections. No vote, it continued, "promoted by the occupation forces" can result in sovereignty and independence for the Iraqi people. It cited "vicious" attacks by the occupation on Iraqi cities like Najaf, Karbalaa, Samara, Mosul, Baghdad and "especially the genocidal war launched on Falluja", as among the reasons for boycotting the elections.

"The undersigned realise that...the results of the vote have already been decided in favour of those supporting the occupation."

The signatories include Sunni, Shia, Christian, Turkman, Kurdish, Islamic and secular groups.

http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2004/721/re7.htm

<<"I've heard the voices of the people that presumably will be in positions of responsibility after these elections, though you never know," Shrub said in an interview>>

What he means is, "We've already rigged it so that "our guys" will win, and they are going to be more than happy with us staying there getting killed for as long as we want. Oh, and get those oil pumps flowing again, of course."

better than I ever could. I can't believe that half of our nation is actually this stupid not to realize that Bush is a dumbass. :mad:

From a fucking crackerjack box?? Nothing he says is ever backed up with any sort of proof.

It should be obvious to even the most obtuse rethug that Bushitler makes this crap up as he goes along.

"The undersigned realise that...the results of the vote have already been decided in favour of those supporting the occupation."

The signatories include Sunni, Shia, Christian, Turkman, Kurdish, Islamic and secular groups.

http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2004/721/re7.htm

Oh poop...you meant proof of bush's bullshit. Nope sorry, only Mr. TerroristCarBomber Allawi wants US troops to stay, & that's because polls in Iraq show that the Iraqis hate his guts.

His blowing up that bus full of schoolkids apparently hasn't been forgotten or forgiven by the Iraqi people.

It is all too crafted with plenty of wiggle room so he can't get pinned down. What he seems to be saying is that Iraq might just "invite" the US to remain in Iraq permanently, as a "stabilizing" influence in the region. No way is it part of the plan to leave that place. The airbases are all set up now. We will be there forever.

From which U.S. can launch attacks against Iran and the rest of the Middle East.

If they don't U.S. "contractors" will put them in a naked pyramid.

It seems to me that Bush is saying that the Social Security privatization he's pushing and that we'll have to borrow trillions and trillions of dollars to implement isn't going to fix the bogus crisis anyway. Wow, that's a killer quote for the Dems to throw back in his smirking face.

"hey, the newly elected goverment asked us to leave. How were we suppose to know that pulling out would result in a civil war?"
:mad: