Insurgents Offer to Halt Attacks in Iraq if US Agrees To Withdraw In 2 Yrs

[kpete]

Insurgents offer to halt attacks in Iraq
By STEVEN R. HURST and QASSIM ABDUL-ZAHRA, Associated Press Writers

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Eleven Sunni insurgent groups have offered an immediate halt to all attacks — including those on American troops — if the United States agrees to withdraw foreign forces from Iraq in two years, insurgent and government officials told The Associated Press on Wednesday.

Withdrawal is the centerpiece of a set of demands from the groups, which operate north of Baghdad in the heavily Sunni Arab provinces of Salahuddin and Diyala. Although much of the fighting has been to the west, those provinces are increasingly violent and attacks there have crippled oil and commerce routes.

The groups who've made contact have largely shunned attacks on Iraqi civilians, focusing instead on the U.S.-led coalition forces. Their offer coincides with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's decision to reach out to the Sunni insurgency with a reconciliation plan that includes an amnesty for fighters.

The Islamic Army in Iraq, Muhammad Army and the Mujahedeen Shura Council — the umbrella group that covers eight militant groups including al-Qaida in Iraq — were not party to any offers to the government.

more at:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060628/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_060628170117;_ylt=AtcxLED3QYz3QuSKHNl8YzxX6GMA;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

[wryter2000]

1. Hmmm

I wonder how the Yeehah in Chief is going to react to this.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

3. "YeeHah in Chief" Perfect. :)

[Xipe Totec]

5. The Yeehahdist...

I think you're onto something good there padner.

:thumbsup:

[HysteryDiagnosis]

2. Muhammad Army and the Mujahedeen Shura Council

Old friends coming to terms..... how refreshing, I think I'll have one more Guinesss, so please understand the posting will not be my fault.


http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa074.html
A critical change in U.S. foreign policy toward world communism has begun during the past year. In marked contrast to the established cold war doctrine of "containing" Soviet expansionism, the new strategy envisions American moral and material support for insurgent movements attempting to oust Soviet-backed regimes in various Third World nations. Initial hints of this "Reagan Doctrine" surfaced in the president's February 1985 State of the Union Address when he affirmed, "We must not break faith with those who are risking their lives--on every continent from Afghanistan to Nicaragua--to defy Soviet aggression and secure rights which have been ours from birth. Support for freedom fighters is self-defense."<1> Administration rhetoric on this theme increased dramatically thereafter. In a speech on February 16, 1985, President Reagan reiterated his assumption that a kinship exists between this country and anti-communist liberation movements:

Time and again we've aided those around the world struggling for freedom, democracy, independence and liberation from tyranny. . . . In the 19th century we supported Simon Bolivar, the great liberator. We supported the Polish patriots, the French resistance and others seeking freedom. It's not in the American tradition to turn away.<2>

The implication was obvious: the United States has an obligation to aid the latest generation of "freedom fighters." Secretary of State George Shultz expanded on this embryonic policy assumption in a February 22, 1985, speech before San Francisco's Commonwealth Club. There and in a subsequent Foreign Affairs article, Shultz asserted that a wave of democratic revolution was sweeping the world. He contended that for years the USSR and its proxies have acted without restraint to back insurgencies designed to spread communist dictatorships. Wars of national liberation "became the pretext for subverting any non-communist country in the name of so-called 'socialist interationalism."' At the same time, the infamous "Brezhnev Doctrine" proclaimed that any victory of communism was irreversible. According to Shultz, the Soviets were saying to the world: "What's mine is mine. What's yours is up for grabs."<3>

Although for a time Moscow's strategy seemed to be working, Shultz stated, such Soviet "pretensions" have provoked a wave of democratic rebellions in the 1980s. In Afghanistan, Nicaragua, Cambodia, Mozambique, Angola, and elsewhere, forces have arisen to challenge Marxist hegemony. This change was of momentous importance, according to Shultz:

[Chichiri]

4. Bush agrees to this, he'll be seen by the TFMs as caving in.

So of course he's not going to do it, regardless of how many lives it would save.

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

7. WAIT A MINUTE

I THINK I SEE ONE MORE EVILDOER.AND ON AND ON AND ON AND ON AND ON AND ON AND ON AND ON AND ON- - - -

[acmavm]

6. Words are cheap. I can see them agreeing to this. But they will be

lying.

[Vidar]

8. This is too reasonable. It'll never happen.