"The security deal under negotiation will replace a U.N. mandate for the presence of U.S. troops that expires on December 31."So all of you out there that are screaming 'get the troops out' -- it is the UN that mandates that they have to be there. I also happen to agree that setting a firm date for removal is a bad deal.
I do believe that the Iraqi government needs to start taking more control of their own security, which they don't seem to be doing.
Yeah they can say things like 'we want full sovereignty' ... but if they don't have the forces ready they aren't going to be able to keep it.
At the first signs of instability you can give dollars to donuts that one of their many past enemies will rush in to take it over -- including the little state of Kuwait....
remember them? we rushed to their aid when Saddam ran their collective ass over?
Actually my guess is that it has less to do with wanting 'sovereignty' and more to do with the two prospects we have for President of the United States...and lets face it they have a right to be worried.
McCain gave the impression (well, okay the media gave McCain the impression) that we will be there forever - actually he was saying that we would stay until the government can stand on its own two feet (Germany/Japan are special circumstances).
Obama said that he wanted to pull out right away ... well at least until last week when he flopped into agreement with McCain -- wait long enough, he'll swing back I'm sure.
The 'third party' candidates all say 'pull, pull, pull' ...
Can you blame them for being worried about what the new year will bring???