Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Sen. Edward Kennedy: Forging a negotiated path to Iraq's future

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-19-08 07:57 AM
Original message
Sen. Edward Kennedy: Forging a negotiated path to Iraq's future
Forging a negotiated path to Iraq's future
Email|Print| Text size – + By Edward M. Kennedy
February 19, 2008

THE BUSH administration is moving forward on negotiations to sign a permanent, long-term agreement with the government of Iraq on the role of the US military in future operations, and an agreement is expected to be concluded by mid-July.

The stakes are high, and these negotiations move us in the wrong direction. America has given the Iraqi people nearly five years of blood and treasure. It's wrong for President Bush to try to bind the next president and lock the nation indefinitely into the endless quagmire that the Iraq war has become.

Iraq is not like the majority of other countries in the world. Its government is dysfunctional, and the country is at war with itself. America does not have a long-term military commitment with any other country, and adopting one with Iraq does not serve our national interest.

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates told the Senate Armed Services Committee this month that the agreement "will not contain a commitment to defend Iraq." Hopefully, the administration's negotiators will concur with his wisdom. But as long as America maintains tens of thousands of troops in Iraq, there is little distinction.

Bush and other administration officials are clearly attempting to downplay the significance of an agreement. They maintain that the final pact will be similar to those the United States has with many other countries, and that Congress does not need to approve it. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The president has given US negotiators authority to go well beyond the type of benign agreement that administration officials are discussing in public. The document signed by Bush and Iraq's prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, outlining the scope of the discussions plainly states that a security commitment can be negotiated, which would obligate the United States to defend Iraq if it is attacked.

more...

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/02/19/forging_a_negotiated_path_to_iraqs_future/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Submariner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-19-08 08:05 AM
Response to Original message
1. I hate this little asshole with every fiber of my being.
What a slimy piece of shit he is. This has ZERO to do with peace, and EVERYTHING to do with trying to invent a legacy that does not say BUSH LOST HIS IRAQ WAR!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 06:30 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC