Bremer: U.S. Will Leave Iraq if Requested

Middle East - AP


Bremer: U.S. Will Leave Iraq if Requested

19 minutes ago


BAGHDAD, Iraq - The U.S. governor of Iraqi told regional officials Friday that the United States would leave Iraq (news - web sites) if requested to do so by the new Iraqi government — although he thinks such a move is unlikely.



L. Paul Bremer told a delegation from Iraq's Diyala province that American forces would not stay where they were unwelcome.


"If the provisional government asks us to leave we will leave," Bremer said, referring to an Iraqi administration due to take power June 30. "I don't think that will happen, but obviously we don't stay in countries where we're not welcome."


The United States plans to keep substantial military forces here after the June 30 handover, prompting critics to question whether Iraqis will gain genuine sovereignty.


~snip~
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=540&ncid=736&e=3&u=/ap/20040514/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_us_withdrawal

The US is not going to put a government in Iraq that would ask it to leave. The real test of Bremer's statement will come when the US puppet government is overthrown by an Islamic group, and the Islamics tell the US to get out. We'll see whether we stay "where we are not welcome".

:shrug:

black out all media reports from Iraq. Switch topic to something else (there are plenty more new countries to invade).

This is the most likely scenario, sadly.

The US is not going to put a government in Iraq that would ask it to leave.

Brahimi's been talking recently like he expects 100% control over the country will be given to the new government; and Chalabi is apparently no longer a US shill. I can almost see the June 30th government making their first act a request for US forces to vacate immediately. That of course will not happen (vacating the country); Bremmer is either a liar or is seriously misguided (probably both).

if it wasn't so tragic.

it seems they do all they can to help me come up with stuff for Bob Boudelang's column....I wish they wouldn't.

they don't want us there...but if Chimpy gets a nice polite note from the puppet government, he'll understand and pull out?

Wonder if Hallmark makes a card for such an occasion?

Then again, this unelected drunk got a memo that SAID "Bin Laden determined to strike within U.S." and couldn't figure out that it meant Bin Laden was determined to strike within the U.S.

Again, it would be comical if it weren't so tragic.

This is the sort of story you wouldn't be surprised to read in the Onion...

These people need to get their dang "talking point" memos out there.

:bounce:

:crazy:

these crooks have poured way too much money to just walk away from Iraq now.

Yes, insofar as it portends the profits they still expect to make with a war that has no foreseeable end. The longer it goes on the more money is made. They don't have to pay the bill, we do. If other sectors are stymied by the huge debt burden on Americans, so much the better. This leads to a society of status, superordination (creditors) over subordination (debtors). This is the vision of an aristocracy threatened by social change after WWII.

The war is necessary to their continued rule. Any ending of warfare would result in a focus on their draconian, harmful and impractical domestic programs, which would be the end of their regime. Warfare, and the misplaced sense of patriotism it arouses among the propagandized masses is the really the only thing that keeps them in power. Their whole m o domestically is straight out of Machiavelli's Discourses. Their foreign policy is dominated by Straussian ideology, "foreignors are barbarians without claim to human rights."

The Iraqi government allows the US to stay in a peacekeeping capacity. However, Iraq is the sole owner of the oil fields and they are in control of the profits needed to rebuild their country decimated by the US and UK.

pay for the destruction we have wrought.

The billions we pump into the bottomless pit of the pentagon to wage this criminal invasion, should pay for damages.

We owe the country of Iraq, bigtime.

the main point of the post was leaving the Iraqis in control of their own natural resources.

Iraq is FUBAR. Cut and run. Invade Syria. Rinse. Repeat.

* is certainly aiming at Syria. The wingnut sites are all drooling again that Iraq's WMD ended up in Syria, and according to Boston Herald this week

Bush accused Syria of pursuing weapons of mass destruction and said that, coupled with its influence over Lebanon, represents an ``extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy and economy of the United States.''
http://news.bostonherald.com/international/view.bg?articleid=27605

I guess they figure everybody is so dumb that the scam will work again and again and again and ....

Just asking

That's why Prince Bandar gets told what the US policy is before Colin Powell gets told...

THis is a flat out lie. The plan (PNAC) was to establish US military bases there from the getgo. They stated (back when the sandstorms stalled things and ther *gasp* was no GREAT news to report) that indeed the US would establish permenant bases in IRaq. Every time I hear a reporter ask, "how long are we going to be there" I want to scream....they already answered that.

The Iraqis "leadership" would last about three days without US protection (ask Karzai if he can leave his bunker) so they aren't going to "ask" us to leave. They aren't going to ask anything they aren't told to ask anyway.

all over the world asked them not to go in, didn't it?

Unless you mean by 'asking' getting somebody in there who doesn't think endless war is campaign strategy, of course. Not sure what the odds are of that, either -- with ol' 'ends justify the means' in the White House, I don't know what to expect beyond June 30th.

Circuses, maybe. They've screwed up the bread -- time for a big circus.

It even amazes me how accurate all of the anti-war arguments turned out to be. Some that I really didn't hear that much of-the military is stretched to its bereaking point- was not expressly implied but basically covered by the "Focus on Afghanistan the ACTUAL war on terror" part of the argument and my main reason for opposing the war-the completely unnecessary loss of American life that of the soldiers.

YEs many protested just because they despise Bush but that contempt has show to be worthwhile in every single example I can think of as well.

from the Onion just prior to the war, where the anti war ponit pretty much summed up everything that did happen (No WMD's found, no link to al Qaeda found, unmanageable chaos, etc.) and the Counterpoint was "Nope...Don't worry...Not going to happen....."

Wish saying "I told you so" helped in any way....

just asking.

-- bremer just doesn't get it...

...if this could be considered a request...

The "coalition of the willing" will be named "peacekeeping forces". See, these are U.S. troops any more. Or, if the bases are labelled "extraterritorial" and leased to the U.S. Guantanamo style, the U.S. can still have it's army where it wants it, but technically is not "occupying" Iraq.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4978361/

If we could see the secret paper trail back to the White House wouldn't this be evidence for Manslaughter?

I also believe in the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny.

The SHEEP are going back to sleep m=now that all thew NEW PHOTOS are safely TUCKED AWAY.

...so this is just a bad joke on the american public.

But what Iraqi govt? The puppets you name? The imaginary elected one that may not ever happen?

I don't think Bremer is too worried about having to leave--

requested by the new provisional Tory Government being installed. However Tory spokesman Benedict Arnold emphasized that the new government would likely ask the British troops to remain until the remnants of George Washington's terrorist insurgents were either killed or captured.

Kinda puts it in words the average 'merican can understand.

That about sums it up! The notion that some kind of puppet government is going to make any kind of "request" is absurd.

that would be much more democratic :)

showing that most Iraqis want us out ASAP.

Bremer tells Iraqi leaders US would leave Iraq if Iraqi government so requests

Friday, May 14, 2004


(05-14) 08:41 PDT BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) --

The U.S. governor of Iraqi told regional officials Friday that the United States would leave Iraq if requested to do so by the new Iraqi government -- although he thinks such a move is unlikely.

L. Paul Bremer told a delegation from Iraq's Diyala province that American forces would not stay where they were unwelcome.

"If the provisional government asks us to leave we will leave," Bremer said, referring to an Iraqi administration due to take power June 30. "I don't think that will happen, but obviously we don't stay in countries where we're not welcome."
(snip)

"However, we do not anticipate that being an issue... . U.S. forces never stay in a foreign country in a situation like we would be staying in Iraq past June 30th if we are not wanted."
(snip/...)

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2004/05/14/international0807EDT0491.DTL

The U.S. military will leave if asked to by any legitimate Iraqi government, but since no legitimate Iraqi government would possibly ask the U.S. military to leave, it won't leave. In a pinch, it might install a new government though.