Snow On Long-Term Military Occupation: ‘Yeah, The Iraqis Want That’

[bigtree]

from Think Progress: http://thinkprogress.org/2007/09/14/snow-iraqis-occupation/


Yesterday, President Bush told the nation he would endorse a long-term U.S. military presence in Iraq: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/13/washington/14text.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&pagewanted=all

At the same time, they understand that success will require U.S. political, economic and security engagement that extends beyond my Presidency. These Iraqi leaders have asked for an enduring relationship with America. And we are ready to begin building that relationship.

Reinforcing Bush’s call, this morning, outgoing White House Press Secretary Tony Snow went as far as to claim the Iraqi public supports Bush’s call for an “enduring” occupation:


Q: How long are we going to be in Iraq? Because the President last night was setting the stage for a long-term relationship with the Iraqis, which would include a U.S. military presence there.

SNOW: Yeah, well, the Iraqis want that.


But earlier this week, an ABC News/BBC/NHK survey of Iraqis stated that 79 percent of Iraqis oppose the U.S. presence — including 84 percent of Shi’as and 98 percent of Sunnis:



Fifty-seven percent of Iraqis approve of attacks on U.S. troops, up from 17 percent in 2004. As Matthew Yglesias observed, “when an actual majority support killing our soldiers, then how, exactly, are the soldiers supposed to help Iraq’s population?”

Furthermore, in June, a majority of the Iraqi Parliament passed a resolution rejecting “the continuing occupation of their country.”

Americans and Iraqis stand united in telling President Bush to withdraw.


my take:

Bush's Enduring Militarism in Iraq
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1807037&mesg_id=1807037
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_ron_full_070914_bush_s_enduring_mili.htm

[LSparkle]

1. Just because the IRAQIS may want it, do WE have to oblige?

And doesn't the CONGRESS have a say in whether or not we pursue one of these "security pacts"? Last time I checked, this wasn't a dictatorship (YET).

[tanyev]

2. Isn't he gone yet?

[rodeodance]

3. would rather have tony than that new b*** coming up

[shain from kane]

4. Shouldn't that be b****? n/t