NEWS: Bush tells Iraqi Prime Minister to Step Aside

According to the New York Times, the U.S. Ambassador to Iraq delivered a message to Shiite leader, Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, indicating President Bush "doesn't want, doesn't support, doesn't accept" Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari, as the head of the next Iraqi government.






Does anyone remember the cold war term "puppet" government?

You have to wonder why Bush would even risk such a communication and open himself to such an accusation...

If true, I think we have seen yet another rational for the war summarily dispensed with by Bush's very own hand... It's hard to claim we are involved in this war to give the Iraqis democracy, when at the same time you oppose the potential outcome such democracy provides.

Amazing. :shk:

For the full NY Times article, see:

Shiites Say U.S. Is Pressuring Iraqi Leader to Step Aside



[edit on 28-3-2006 by loam]

He, he, so now is very clear as who runs the Iraqi country. I guess we broke it now we own it.

But speaking realistically the country doesn't have a permanent government the elections were for the establishment of a parliament that will over see the next elections or I guess real elections.

Right now actually Iraq is without a real government.

You know it gets confusing after a while.

About half the voting population in the United States handed George Bush the same kind of note in both of the last eleections, he didn't and is still not listening.

so much for democracy huh? that petty little man thinks he can rule Iraq from washington...what a bloody fool does he even have a clue as to what type of message this sends, warranted or not?

grover

Its not surprise at all we all know who is in charge.

No wonder Bush said that our troops future depend on the government of Iraq, well we all know who the government is. Right?

Uh, sems like conjecture at this point. Why don't we wait for someone else but the TimesLiesTimes to chime in before we speculate.....


ca.today.reuters.com

mod edit to shorten link



[edit on 28-3-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

That petty little man is a big advocate of democray, so long as it goes his way. I repeat the man and his advisors are blind if they don't know the message that this will send, especially to that part of the world...but then we already know that.

US ARMY NEEDS VOLUNTEERS. OR, HOW WOULD YOU LIKE TO DIE FOR THIS WHITE HOUSE FIASCO POSING AS A GOVERNMENT?

posted by loam: “According to the NY Times, the U.S. Ambassador to Iraq delivered a message to Shiite leader, Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, indicating President Bush "doesn't want, doesn't support, doesn't accept" Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari, as the head of the next Iraqi government. [Edited bu Don W]

Sweet Jesus! First we say we’re for democracy. IT’S TO DIE FOR. Then we say we don’t like Hamas. Now we say we don’t like Iraq’s al Jaafari for PM. What the heck kind of democracy are we FOR? Do you think we know? Is this whole Iraqi adventure a WORK IN PROGRESS for the White House?

The Geo W administration has told Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari he is unacceptable . . R J Taki, a member of parliament, told the Times Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad passed on "a personal message from President Bush" at a meeting last Saturday. Taki said Khalilzad told Shiite leader Abdul al-Hakim that Geo W "doesn't want, doesn't support, doesn't accept" Jaafari for PM. Jaafari and other Shiite leaders are not taking the message well.

What would you expect? No self-respecting person would accept this outside interference in purely internal matters. It is inconsistent with the idea Of National Self Determination. Why have 3 elections if the US is going to DICTATE the outcome?

Does anyone remember the cold war term "puppet" government? You have to wonder why Bush would even risk such a communication and open himself to such an accusation . . we have seen yet another rational for the war summarily dispensed with by Geo W's very own hand . . It's hard to claim we are involved in this war to give the Iraqis democracy, when at the same time Geo W opposes the potential outcome such democracy provides. by loam [Edited by Don W]

Here’s more from the article: “ . . following an assault Sunday night by American and Iraqi forces on a Shiite mosque in northern Baghdad Shiite leaders say at least 17 civilians were killed in the battle mostly political party members . . American commanders say the soldiers had fought insurgents.

Well, NOTE, the American Commander did NOT say we had not done it, he just adds we were fighting insurgents. Collateral damage. This amounts to an ADMISSION in my mind. NOTE: I do not blame the American commander, because I don’t want any more Americans KILLED in Iraq. Shoot first and ask questions later is OK by me. (But not OK to the Iraqis.) IT IS TIME FOR ‘MATT DILLON’ TO GET OUT OF TOWN?

on Monday Shiite leaders suspended participation in the negotiations to form a government, saying they were enraged by the mosque assault . .

IT DOES NOT GET BETTER. After the Dynamic Trio - VP Cheney, the Oberfuhrer and Geo W - failed to take the advice from the professionals at the Pentagon, what can you expect? The White House learning curve is notoriously SLOW! And is paid for by 2,500 DEAD GIs. Ahmed Chalabi, where are you when Geo W needs you?

on Monday the police discovered 14 bodies in western Baghdad, all executed with gunshot wounds to the head, the latest victims of sectarian bloodletting. Iraqi forces found another 18 bodies near Baquba of people who had been killed in a similar manner. .

We have about 140,000 men in Iraq. I don’t know how many other Coalition Forces are there. One US general said we need 300,000 men to PACIFY Iraq. But, I’ve heard this before. In Vietnam. 30 years ago. Oops! Those guys have all retired.

Security Minister Abdul Karim al-Enizi said on the state-run Iraqiya tv network the Iraqi forces who had raided the Shiite mosque in Baghdad were not part of the Interior or Defense Ministries. A survivor said the soldiers did not speak Arabic well, implying they may have been Kurdish militiamen working with Americans, Mr. Enizi said.

Uh-oh! This is not good. The Kurds had better stay in the North of Iraq - a/k/a Kurdistan. So far, this fiasco has been good to the Kurds. Don’t get mixed up with the US or you’ll blow it.

The Prime Minister, Ibrahim al-Jaafari, who the Shiites insist should stay in his post four more years, is the favorite of Iran, and has the support of Moktada al-Sadr, the radical anti-American cleric who controls at least 32 parliamentary seats in the 275-member Parliament . .

WHO’S in charge here? Iran or Geo W?

[edit on 3/28/2006 by donwhite]
Mod Note: All Caps – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 28-3-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

Machiavelli has a chapter pertaining to this:

Chapter VIII
Concerning Those Who Have Obtained A Principality By Wickedness

And the people of Iraq wonder...

From A Family in Baghdad:

… they build military bases which spell the message -- they want to remain forever, that they do not care for our souls, and that everything that is happening to us pours into their interest and is a reason for them to stay …

- Iraq is torn apart …
- Iraq is ruined …
- Iraq became a heap of debris …
- Is this what they want?
- Was this their aim in this war?

[edit on 28-3-2006 by psyopswatcher]

Security Minister Abdul Karim al-Enizi said on the state-run Iraqiya tv network the Iraqi forces who had raided the Shiite mosque in Baghdad were not part of the Interior or Defense Ministries. A survivor said the soldiers did not speak Arabic well, implying they may have been Kurdish militiamen working with Americans, Mr. Enizi said.

The Iraqi kurdish speak the same language as the rest of the Iraq nation, they have two dialects and they all part of the general Iraq language.

So I find kind of interesting that they are implying that kurdish do not speak Iraqi or arabic.

BTW the majority are part of sunnis also.

funny

Originally posted by marg6043So I find kind of interesting that they are implying that kurdish do not speak Iraqi or arabic.

There's no Iraqi language to my knowledge. There is Arabic and there is the Kurdish language. Perhaps they are saying that their native language was not Arabic, but rather, Kurdish. There are lots of Kurdish in Iraq and Turkey that do not speak their respective national languages.

US ARMY NEEDS VOLUNTEERS. OR, HOW WOULD YOU LIKE TO DIE FOR THIS WHITE HOUSE FIASCO POSING AS A GOVERNMENT?

posted by marg6043: “The Iraqi Kurdish speak the same language as the rest of Iraq. They have two dialects and are all part of the general Iraq language. It’s interesting the story writers are implying the Kurdish do not speak Iraqi or Arabic. BTW the majority of Kurds are Sunni also. [Edited by Don W]

The story is by the NY Times, normally reliable, but like our own military and intelligence forces, they may be SHORT on good interpreters. And I’m SURE no NYT editor reads or speaks Arabic. Americans were just barely getting into Spanish when this Second Punitive Expedition to Iraq, a/k/a Operation Iraqi Freedom, was launched on short notice.

Geo W has already promised he - uh, WE - are staying at least until January 20, 2009. TOO bad for the Iraqis. IF we have killed 30,000 so far, then, it may reach 60,000 by 2009. The US has lost about 2,415 KIA so, that may reach 4,830 by 2009. Geez. Geo W will really leave a L E G A C Y behind. He will be just behind Richard Nixon’s death toll in Vietnam.

I kind of got fix in the language insinuation more than anything else because up to this day the Kurdish has kept themselves apart from the rest of the Iraqi country in their own proclaim borders.

Yes I know is Arabic and dialects spoken by the tribes I just wanted to keep it as Iraqi area when I said Iraqi language.

Taking in consideration that Iraqi Kurdish are Iraqis after all they should be able to speak the language.

Now if the group with the American soldiers didn't know how to speak the language well like is been implied then could it be special forces disguised as Arabs or Kurdish?

Or perhaps somebody wants to blame the Kurdish people somehow.

I kind of find that suspicious.

Or like Donwhite said it could be that US is running out of interpreters.

posted by marg6043: “I got the language insinuation more than anything else because the Kurdish has kept themselves apart from the rest of the Iraqi country in their own borders. Yes I know Arabic dialects are spoken by the tribes I just wanted to keep it as Iraqi when I said “Iraqi language.”

Iraqi Kurdish are Iraqis after all. They should be able to speak the language. Now if the group with the American soldiers didn't know how to speak the language, well it is implied it could be special forces disguised as Arabs or Kurds? Or perhaps somebody wants to blame the Kurds. Somehow, I find that suspicious. Or like Don White said it could be the US is running out of interpreters.” [Edited by Don W]

This reminds me of the forged documents relating to the enriched uranium Saddam was supposed to be getting from Niger. Colin Powell offered those documents at his February speech to the UN. The next day, the head of the IAEA pronounced the documents to have been forged. A couple days later, the U.S. admitted - or confirmed - the documents were indeed forged but our newsmen did not follow up on the logical questions: Who did it? Why did they do it?

Powell said the documents came from the Brits MI6. I accept the Brits “could” have done it, but I don’t think they would do it on their own initiative. Saddam certainly would not have done it. Nor would Niger. So who stands to gain from the forgeries? Right! The Bush Pro War Team.

I offer that Bush, Cheney and the Oberfuhrer (Rumsfeld), the dynamic trio running the second Iraqi adventure out of the Oval Office, ordered the CIA to make the forgeries. The CIA then forwarded them to MI6, which in turn sent them back to the US of A under their imprimatur. Powell says he got the papers from MI6 and he might actually believe that to be true.

Although I am prepared to admit their was no malevolent intent on the part of the US Army, there is no doubt the raid on the mosque was a serious faux pas. Another of a long string of intelligence failures. An already tenuous situation in Iraq was made more tentative.

Whether or not the US can get an Iraqi government it wants or can deal with is getting more problematic every day. What Bush/Cheney/Oberfuhrer do not want to happen is for the new government to ask the United States to leave Iraq at once! In other words, to kick us out! That is becoming more and more likely.

This is a very delicate issue. Ambassador Khalilzad has already drawn major criticism from Shiite leaders for what they perceive as his heavy handedness in trying to get them to do what they perceive as Washington's wishes, driven by political imperatives, not the reality on the ground. The sad fact is that there are no "Iraqis" at this point (though there once were), only religious and ethnic groups vieing for power. When we hear about all these "Iraqi" battalions that are combat ready, what people don't realize is that the vast majority of those doing the fighting are Peshmerga....Kurds...and NOT Iraqis...