The U.S. will not decide when our presence in Iraq ends...Iraq will.

[Clarkie1]

Agree or disagree? I posted the following in another thread, but would like to created a separate discussion because I think it is an important enough idea to warrant a separate thread (it certainly came as somewhat of a shock to me):

I think hubris has been displayed by both the U.S. Senate as well as the "President" in the attitude that it is WE who must decide the future of the American presence in Iraq. No. It is the sovereign Iraqi government that will decide that, in negotiations with the Americans (unless we behave in a completely unethical way from this point forward). The most honorable thing we can do is to work with the Iraqi government to achieve their goal. There is no need for US to set a unilateral timetable, because it is clear they do not want us there indefinitely anyway (and never did). The best thing we can do in Iraq to enhance our tarnished image in the world is to be seen working with the Iraqi government and respecting their wishes...neither leaving before they ask us to leave nor staying beyond our welcome.

Maliki's proposal will be debated in the Iraqi Parliament. There is no guarantee of agreement. And, even when some sort of "peace plan" is implemented, it is unlikely to call for U.S. forces to withdraw as fast as humanly possible. We still have responsibilities in Iraq, and we must respect the government there as a sovereign one. Naturally, we may use leverage like all nations do to try and encourage them on what we perceive as the best path (unfortunately what the neo-cons perceive as the best path will not be the best), but the end decision must be up to Iraq in determining when U.S. troops are no longer serving a useful purpose in helping to fix the mess our presence there created.

It looks like it may become a bit of a catch-22 for Bush, depending on how things develop. Fine with me.

[mike_c]

1. I swear I remember reading something like this in 1969 or 1970....

Your subject line, I mean, only referring to Vietnam, of course. It sent shivers down my back.

[Robbien]

2. The peace plan is asking to bring the UN into it

The plan asks that a U.N. Security Council decree confirm the timetable in the plan which takes the timetable out of the US's hands. Good move on the part of Iraq.

Now BushCo can save face, declare mission accomplished and go home. {But what about those 14 permanent bases and Bush's palace?}

Or

If BushCo doesn't agree with the plan, then that is putting lie to the sovereignty of the Iraqi nation. The spin machine will have to go into over-drive on this one.