Last Sunday, the Iraqi parliament voted 170-0 to order the government to expel US and other foreign troops from Iraqi soil. Getting to the goal from the vote is easier said than done, with the State Department warning Iraq that they are not at all willing to discuss troop withdrawals.
US officials have said they have no intention of leaving Iraq, but they’re skirting the legal reality of the situation by saying they’ve yet to get a formal request from Iraq to leave. How long they can maintain that pretense by simply telling Iraq not to talk about it remains to be seen.
Iraq is already looking for holes in this fairly transparent attempt to avoid discussion, with Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi asking Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to devise some sort of mechanism whereby Iraq could actually request the US to leave.
The State Department has refused to comment on that request, and Mahdi’s further request for a US delegation to talk with about it was met with the US warning that any delegation they send would not be willing to talk about it.
Clearly, this is not a long-term solution, as Iraq has plainly been moving to expel US forces, and the administration simply can’t pretend they never heard about it. This is going to be treated the same as refusing the order to leave, which is what President Trump seemed to be suggesting they were going to do anyhow.
In addition to saying he didn’t intend to leave Iraq, President Trump also threatened Iraq earlier in the week with massive sanctions for even requesting the pullout. Since the US presence in Iraq was supposed to be based on Iraq’s request, the withdrawal of that request is going to remain a substantial legal problem.
The “exceptional” fascist regime officially (again) occupying Iraq. This time however it won’t end very well for the US no matter how “exceptional ” they claim themselves to be.
Good times for the body bag and coffin industry. Send your thanks to Tel Aviv.
I think Hillenbrand is a big maker of coffins. Probably would be a good stock to invest in.
It’s like little children putting their fingers in their ears and screaming so they can’t hear their parents telling them what to do.
“In addition to saying he didn’t intend to leave Iraq, President Trump also threatened Iraq earlier in the week with massive sanctions for even requesting the pullout.”
This coming from a guy who supposedly got nominated because he said that we should have never invaded Iraq.
“We will charge [Iraq] sanctions like they’ve never seen before, ever. It’ll make Iranian sanctions look somewhat tame.” Trump added the sanctions would be imposed on Iraq, “if there’s any hostility, that they do anything we think is inappropriate.” In Trump-speak that means, “We are your imperial masters. You will obey us or we will kill 500,000 of your children with sanctions… again!”
That’s what the US political establishment hates about him the most, that he actually tells the truth about our imperial ways. They are right out there in the open for the whole world to see, not couched in some diplomatically-correct language. He talks like a gangster because is is a gangster, and has been for decades.
Trump also threatened the Iraqi PM before the assassination.
Here from moon of alabama
As the Iraqi Prime Minister explained.
“After my return from China, Trump called me and asked me to cancel the agreement, so I also refused, and he threatened me with massive demonstrations that would topple me. Indeed, the demonstrations started and then Trump called, threatening to escalate in the event of non-cooperation and responding to his wishes, so that the third party (Marines snipers) would target the demonstrators and security forces and kill them from the highest structures and the US embassy in an attempt to pressure me and submit to his wishes and cancel the China agreement, so I did not respond and submitted my resignation and the Americans still insist to this day on canceling the China agreement and when the defense minister said that who kills the demonstrators is a third party, Trump called me immediately and physically threatened me and defense minister in the event of talk about the third party.”
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2020/01/blowback-from-the-soleimani-assassination-increases-as-iraq-reveals-how-trump-tried-to-steal-its-oil.html
Yes, but when Republican senators — including Lindsay Graham — have CONDITIONS for voting in Senate for Trump, what would YOU do?
They are all lying through their false teeth — Soleimani was just one of the picks from a list, nothing to do with future dangers.
But revenge is sweet for neocons.
He is a symbol for many their defeats. He participated in Iraq-Iran war, where Saddam Hussein was our ally. Iran being an adult and suggested mutual desire to end war that bled them both.
Such ending in 1988 was a very unhappy outcome for Reagan era. Bush Senior then set up Kuwait trap — and Saddam was ousted from Kuwait, but more importantly, was prohibited literally from flying over Kurdistan, setting a stage for Clinton-style attack on Iran.
Little known in US, Clinton used Iraqi Kurdistan to arm Iranian Kurds, and sent them to attack Iraqi army. Just coming out of exhausting Iraqi war, Iran was not ready. This was Soleimani’s first high level command responsibility. It took seven years, but Iran won, decisively.
Clinton invested heavily in this venture and lost. Then came Bush Junior, occupation of Iraq as a phase to get Iran.
But things did not go well, as Iran helped Iraq, and in spite of Petraeus “surge” involving newly armed Sunni “Awakening” militia — ostensibly against mythical Al-Qaeda, things went bad.
To make things worse — attempt by Israel to occupy Lebanon
after a bombing campaign. It has been claimed that Soleimani helped Hezbollah militia defend Lebanon, and force Israel’s ground invasion to retreat after heavy losses. This military defeat Israel has been trying to airbrush from history, but Soleimani was blamed.
Obama administration saw withdrawal from
Iraq, another loss attributed to Iran.
But things were looking up — US had developed budding relationship with Saudi officials to promote Islamuc militancy.
Back in the nineties under Clinton a very successful plan was hatched in Bosnia bringing in Islamic militants to help Bosnian Moslems. The head-chopping, soccer playing with heads was all the rage — but our propaganda was merciless, blaming Serbs for everything. It worked well, and as Al-Qaeda transformed from freedom fighters in Afghanistan to bad guys — it was time to fashion new brand — Islamist groups of Salafi persuasion.
And after Egyptian Arab Spring, such groups proliferated — in Egypt where Salafis toppled Morsi, to Syria, Libya, Mali, Iraq, Algeria, Tunis. Most people still not get it — Saudi organized Salafi movements in Egyptian countryside were the cause for toppling Morsi — and forced military hand. It was rule of military or civil war.
The success in Egypt, Syria and Libya, created a more ambitious project. ISIS, Here, the objective was not only to create chaos , snd topple regime — but to actually create a territory under Caliphate — a Sunni entity carving out parts of Iraq and Syria. Had this succeeded — Kurds would have carved out territories in Syria and Iraq, while Sunnis in Lebanon would have been forced to subjugate Shia.
The plan was to cut Iran permanently from the Mediterranean, and marginalize them in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq. At the height if ISIS success in early 2015 US managed to promote the fortunes of man mostly credited for internationalizing Islamic militants — Mohammed Bin Nayaf. US lobbied for him to become
Saudi Crown Prince, next in line to become a King.
But fortunes turned around — Russia entered Syria in fall 2015. ISIS was beaten in Syria, only remained in US overflight area. Russia- Iran-Iraq formed intelligence sharing group, and Iraq used both its army and militias to beat ISIS back.
By 2016 Iraq made progress, and US started using Kurdish militia — sensing end of ISIS. US chose to prop up PKK Kurds in Iraq and in Syria — abandoning Peshmerga Kurds in Iraq.
That was fateful decision — as Peshmerga took revenge by not helping when Iraq forces took Sinjar and Kirkuk.
In 2016 candidate Trump was talking big — he was to fight ISIS.
Saudis were in shock. Up until then, Obama inly hit “commanders”, but never fought ISIS — with the exception of giving Kurds Iraqi cities as a leverage.
By 2017, Trump came to power. Iraqi surrounded Mosul, US bombed it — but Iraq actually beat ISIS. Before the ISIS inglorious end — Mohammed Bin Nayef was removed from the Crown Prince function — and MBS appointed.
Mosul fell in fall 2017 and Raqqa a year later.
Soleimani was credited, or blamed for the success of Iraqi army and Shia militia in beating ISIS.
US is trying now in Iraq to reignite Sunni -Shia divide, but after ISIS defeat, Sunni tribal leaders are sticking with Baghdad. They have been burned enough.
After defeat of Kurds in Syria, not many candidates remain for secessionism for US to use. Thus propping up protests, until a new plan is devised.
Not many candidates remain for fighting Iran. Not Saudi Arabia for sure.
Soleimani became a symbol of all that went wrong since 1979.
I agree with you 100%, Bianca .. great post;D
The key will be if the Iraq military stops coordinating with the US and asks us to leave their bases. Can’t base American soldiers out in the field.
I have finally been able to find the pertinent text of the currently active agreement on armed forces between the US and Iraq. It is not the Status of Armed Forces Agreement which President Bush II signed at the end of 2008 because it ended automatically on December 31 of 2011 hence is no longer in force.
The still operative agreement with Iraq is “Strategic Framework Agreement of Friendship and Cooperation between the United States and Iran.” Was signed in Baghdad on November 17, 2008. Our signer was Ryan C. Crocker, not President Bush II. In force on January 1, 2009. It does have text on US armed forces.
Section I, Par. 3: “The temporary presence of US forces in Iraq is at the request and initiation of the sovereign Government of Iraq and with full respect of the sovereignty of Iraq.”
Section I Par. 4. The United States shall not use Iraqi land. sea, and air as a launching or transition point for attacks against any other countries, nor seek or request permanent bases or permanent military presence in Iraq.”
Section
Section XI, Par. 2. This agreement shall remain in force unless either Party provides written notice to the other of the intent to terminate this Agreement. The termination shall be effective one year after the date of such notification.
Unlike SOFA 2008 this agreement does not have an automatic termination date hence is still in force.
To me it is clear that the two Articles of Section I can only mean that our killing of General Suleiman and his Iraqi aide at the Baghdad airport was a brazen violation of this agreement. Sovereignty means unfettered and ultimate control of air space and that includes US drones. The action should have been first brought before the Joint Commission for Iraq’s approval. There was plenty of time available for that because the plan to kill Suleiman was hatched long ago.
Section XI makes absolutely clear that the Government of Iraq can demand in writing the removal all of our armed forces from sovereign Iraq. Our government cannot say no but has one year to prepare for the withdrawal. If we are obviously unwanted it would be wise to leave as soon as possible.
So what does the vote in Iraq’s parliament mean? With regards to this agreement it means nothing. It’s real meaning is that the nation of Iraq now supports its government to demand US forces withdrawal.
Let us hope that President Trump considers the Iraqi’s ungrateful to him and submits his own letter of departure. In that case there need to be no one year waiting.
Good find; however notice that Iraq has not delivered formal written notice of terminating the agreement.
This is the U.S. Deep State’s final revenge on Solemani; he dies for nothing, accomplishing nothing, becoming just another trophy kill on the wall.
Not so fast to dismiss Iraqi resolve so early in this chain of events… The Iraqis have been throught a lot lately but this moment of political alignments will have its chain of related events too. Hard to believe the pols can hold out very long refusing to submit said written written request. Have faith in the Iraquis. Moktada AL Sadr- is a towering presence. He is the man responsible for the Democratic system there. The occupier killed, arrested, bribed, blackmailed, cajoled every other leader of note save Sistani to allow Bush to appoint all regional leaders. Sadr got hundreds of thousands of demonstrators on the street probably a million or more, with his “Madi Army”.
The numbers were so great that there was no way to cope with them by the numbers of troops bush could muster. Sadr shows that religious leaders can be the hardest to roll. He is a Titan of resolve.
Well, I hope you are right, for their sake, as well as ours.
Well, the way I read it is — US violated the Agreement, and it should go.
What US is trying to do is — make it go under the clause of each party’s right to invoke end of Agreement, and a year-ling separation. And to make it even more interesting US is not allowing anyone to talk about it, that is even regular, one year notice may be considered hostile, as it was not a result of agreement.
We will see how far it goes — Iraq is in weakened position as the current head of the Government is a lame duck with probably no authority.
Messy situation. Trump who talked so much about Iraqi war, shoved it in Bush the candidate’s face m, blaming his brother Bush Junior for Iraqi mess — now stuck in Iraq making a giant mess of his own. All of our presidents since Carter, were drawn to Iraq like a moth to the flame.
The sanctions Trump threatened would likely essentially cut Iraq off from world trade in U.S. dollars; in a sense a return to the sanctions era under Sadddam.
The Shia are no more likely to stomach that than the Sunni or Kurds, major ethnic blocks who abstained from even showing up to vote on the resolution.
Trump generally acts with a very good idea of what he can get away with and how far the envelope can be stretched without breaking – on him, at least.
Trump should just go with they can’t kick us because we were already leaving line. He can change corse… his base wont even question the contradiction cause they literally cannot see when he does dumb shit so he doesn’t have to worry about that…
Translation:
Iraqi government: Bribe us extra!
Trump: Not one penny more, loser.
Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi did not deliver anything legally binding like a formal notice terminating the U.S. stay. A phone call is just for popular optics, not effect.
The long term trend is for the Pentagon to reduce its bootprint in the world, Even if Trump is a Pentagon man and so inclined to let them keep the lucrative Iraq contract.
Privatizing the Imperial wars with mercenaries and the CIA like Blackwater founder Eric Prince suggests is the future.
https://thehill.com/policy/defense/396714-blackwater-founder-proposes-mercenary-takeover-in-afghanistan-amidst-mueller-probe
Meanwhile, the Deep State’s final revenge on Soleimani is his impotence in death, just another trophy kill on the wall of history gathering dust as yesterday’s news.
What appalling ingratitude. After all we did to bring them peace and prosperity. After all we did to give them freedom, democracy, liberty and a chance to create a better future. And have they forgotten that while it is costing us trillions in tax payer dollars, all it cost them was 500,000 children. Yea, children who as adults, would have turned into radical terrorists and used WMD’s against us. What appalling ingratitude.
See a doctor!
I thought that was sarcasm. Had to be. No way I upvote that otherwise.
Since the US presence in Iraq was supposed to be based on Iraq’s request, the withdrawal of that request is going to remain a substantial legal problem.
The question is for whom is this going to be a “substatjcial legal problem”..????? For Trump et al, or Iraq…???
Naturally, trump doesn’t get the message, strange, because it was one many opposite messages from his campaign. Some, I guess, still buy the “trump peace train” pitch. US troops are bunkered in Iraq, modern fortifications which require far more tools than Iraq can muster. Air dominance, satellite dominance. The Iraqis have already paid a huge price trying to resist the best automated military money can buy. If there were a chink in the armor, the US would have been out years ago.
Sad tho, the “outsider” potus, has been “outside” on the opposite side of antiwar. No, he doesn’t need to be president for any reason, impeachment is not an issue. Even if convicted, so what, he plays golf, watches tv, and gets a tv show to talk about how great he is as a citizen (doubt he ever voted). He has taken this opportunity (in the mind of his acolytes) to expand, and commit a declaration of war against both Iran, and Iraq by assassinating political leaders.
Hopefully, when november comes around, his “antiwar” voters will awaken from their dream.
That’s why voters should support Tulsi Gabbard – the only one who professes to be totally against the forever wars. Sadly, they don’t.
You might want to look more closely into what Gabbard “professes.”
I already have and she’s clearly a dove when it comes to our needless wars in the Middle East and Afghanistan. Compare her stance on that issue compared to the other Dem candidates and DNC in general, and you’ll have your answer why she was blamed for the so-called dastardly act of meeting with Assad. The warmongering media hates her and so does the Deep State supra-political establishment.
“In short, when it comes to the war against terrorists, I’m a hawk” — Tulsi Gabbard, 2016
“I still believe that the right approach to take is these quick-strike forces, surgical strikes in and out, very quickly … and the very limited use of drones in those situations where our military is not able to get in without creating an unacceptable level of risk.” — Tulsi Gabbard, 2018
Good one! I still “believe” she’s less of a warmonger than the rest of the field, not vying for occupations and invasions.
I agree, she’s the best on foreign policy that the Uniparty has on offer at the moment.
But that’s a low, low bar.
The US will leave Iraq on its own terms and when it is “safe” to do so, US National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien has said. “I think we’ll come up with a solution, we had a team from NATO here this week. I think you’re going to see far more NATO involvement in Iraq,” O’Brien added.
What he means is when the US is going to pull out, they let their NATO goons take their place, if NATO is stupid enough to do so.
Iraq is just another Okinawa or Diego Garcia.
O https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/85682ec7e283d3c0729852dcbd6c0a031ba04ef9e75acc80a322733b7c4d4293.jpg https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/85113f34debc9709028ef24ce9b6ae52ddf3d1014661e3c8a90314a2121e87cb.jpg https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/1b2432d1d8d626c0d3c765a24697a5d60f538233d1a58e206fbad8b5e79a0ed8.jpg ccupation by any other nation is still occupation, remember vietnam? Still how most americans refuse to understand, that they were fighting for their freedom,country,families,etc…That’s why( i just read this stupidity on a military site) america didnt ‘win’. The vietnamese had no where else to go and how many american Kids did not want to be in vietnam?
The legal issue is clear. The vote in Iraq’s parliament does not require that the Trump administration remove all US armed forces personnel and their civilian personnel from Iraq. That was a strong call for the government of Iraq to do what that nation obviously wants namely the full departure of US forces from Iraq. That departure is apparently also supported by a majority of our nation.
The demand for withdrawal becomes legal once the government of Iraq gives a written document to that effect to our government.
As expected President Trump is threatening Iraq to prevent that letter to be given. Will he back down?
Given the existing agreement on the presence of our armed forces in Iraq, every other government of the UN must make it clear to President Trump that it supports Iraq. Netanyahu who is the co-architect of our Iraq policy will not support Iraq.
The world has become totally lawless again. Two earlier years when that was the case: 1918 and 1939.
War party never forgave Obama for pulling out on W’s schedule, so how they going to deal with Trump getting THROWN out?
What? All those American casualties to bring democracy to Iraq, and now that reason has been shown to be as phony as the WMD, in the form of a mushroom cloud.