US wants open-ended Iraq commitment

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s1118552.htm

The US says it will oppose attempts by other members of the United Nations Security Council to set a date for coalition forces to leave Iraq.

The suggestion was raised in discussions on a draft Anglo- American resolution on the handover to an interim Iraqi Government due to happen on June 30.

China has proposed ending the mandate in January 2005, when Iraqis are to go to the polls for their first election in the post- Saddam Hussein era.

There has been support for this from France and Germany.

But the State Department's Richard Boucher disagrees, pointing to the insurgency of the past year.

...more...

...that President Kerry will immediately begin to cooperate with the U.N. and that they will no longer have a say.

They are the chief indicator--if they stay, we stay, if they are never built, we will likely leave.

talk about the military installations that are under construction. I understand that there are 14 such air bases being build.

If true, who could ever believe in there wildest expectations that the U.S. would ever leave Iraq?

When we were phasing out our presence in Saudi Arabia (one of Osama's chief goals, incidentally), the press often reported that a lot of our presence in the Middle East would be in future Iraq bases. Now everyone seems whisper quiet about it, though they are under construction, I hear.

"The Largest Embassy In The World?" Like that has a chance in hell if the Theocracy I suspect will win out here becomes reality.

Talk about professional wrestling and their antics!! This is ludicrous is have this performing buffoon at the helm of one of the richest countries in world after being convicted in the Iran/Contra scam and being guilty of death squads in Latin American.

His resumé conceals the darker side of Negroponte. This may explain why the ambassador has, since his nomination, been ducking requests for press interviews, especially from reporters with some historical memory. As New Republic assistant editor Sarah Wildman put it, with Negroponte's nomination, "human rights activists did a collective double take." Indeed, Negroponte has a reputation, even among some U.S. diplomats who served with him, both for "doggedly defending U.S. interests overseas" and for "making sure human rights don't get in the way." Wildman finds this particularly problematic, since "one of the primary responsibilities of junior's new ambassador to the United Nations will be to berate countries like China, Burma, and Afghanistan for their violations of human rights."

I haven't seen anything about that!

This one is published on khilafah.com but it's from the Chicago Tribune; it is, indeed the same article, but you don't have to "log in" here. "14 permanent bases set in Iraq."

www.khilafah.com/home/category.php?DocumentID=9270&TagID=2

"Iraq-U.S.: Is it the Bases?" from Inter Press Service News Agency last January, gives the number as 4:

www.ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=21331

On the other hand, Rumsfeld dismissed as "inaccurate and unfortunate" any suggestion that the United States seeks a permanent military presence in Iraq, noting that there has been "zero discussion" on that among senior Bush administration officials.

Would he lie to us?

http://usembassy.state.gov/islamabad/wwwh03042202.html

Lots more to be found. Google is your friend.

Google, however, is nobody's friend. Friends don't snoop into you email or censor your reading material.

And I use two e-mail systems that have nothing to do with Google.

looking...

I know that I have read more in some mainstream press articles...
http://www.unknownnews.net/google.html
Opposing war makes Unknown News a hate site?

With a "Free Get Out Of Jail Card."

When will Dimbo realize that 99% of the World's Leaders are either smarter than he is or depends on advisers for intelligent advice?

Then it would be hunky dory to have a few Crusader castles poised on the pipelines, the benevolent friends of the Iraqis.

This must be Clause 22 in the new Iraqi Constitution. If you are (in) trouble, we have to be there. If not, then of course you'll want us to stay. If you ask us to politely leave then you probably don't really mean it, surely?

and the UN knows it. After the November election, there will be a new American Administration to deal with -- one can't help but wonder if these proposed conditions are an attempt by foreign governments to impose a set of conditions that the Bush Administration would never accept, and in the process, make Bush look like an obstructionist.

this shit they will lose whatever is left of their credibility and reveal themselves as nothing but tools of our regime. The junta's plans and BS are SO obvious.