Iraq Passes SOFA

[davidswanson]

The Iraqi Parliament has approved a treaty with the United States or rather its government or rather its lameduck president, although its lameduck president has already made clear his intention to "interpret" it to mean whatever the heck he wants, meaning that the new president will be free to do that or not as he and his progressive supporters or he and his neocon advisors see fit.

AFP reports:

The vote came after a flurry of last-minute negotiations in which the main Sunni parties secured a package of political reforms from the government and a commitment to hold a referendum on the pact in the middle of next year. Should the Iraqi government decide to cancel the pact after the referendum it would have to give Washington one year's notice, meaning that troops would be allowed to remain in the country only until the middle of 2010.

So, that could get the United States out of Iraq in a year and a half, or about the timeframe Obama promised anyway, except perhaps more completely than in Obama's original plan. Or the United States and Iraq could simply agree to get out faster or more slowly; nothing is carved in stone.

The curious thing, of course, about this brutal mission to continue imposing our system of democracy on Iraq by staying and killing for additional years is that their parliament voted, and our Congress covered its ears, closed its eyes, and hummed. Their media covered the ongoing negotiations, while ours watched Sarah Palin pardon turkeys. Their people will get to vote on the fate of their country, while ours only got to vote for the guy who wanted Robert Gates to be Secretary of "Defense" or the other guy who preferred Robert Gates for that job.

What would happen if the American people got to vote or had people in Washington actually represent them on Iraq, on Paulson's Plunder, or on defunding all such madness and paying instead for green jobs, schools, and things we can actually use? Maybe there's something we can learn from Iraq. Oddly nodoby's requested an occupation of Iraqi troops to help "teach" us.

[Buzz Clik]

1. Who'd a thunk it? George Bush flying the white flag of surrender.

Sarah Palin must be in a deep, dark depression.

[booley]

2. Is it true there was no English translation?

That no version was available for Americans to read to we wouldn't know what the terms actually were until AFTER it had passed?

And isn't this a treaty? Wouldn't Congress have to pass it?

[davidswanson]

4. IraqOilReport.com

posted the original English weeks ago, but everyone pretends that never happened because it hasn't been in the corporate media

yes it's a treaty

[bigtree]

3. .

[Leopolds Ghost]

5. In other words, Obama doesn't want all troops out. Iraqi voters do. US voters don't get referendum

That would be "in a democracy, not a republic."

THe oil companies must be protected and Obama's economic advisers and national security team will see to it, as the folks around Kerry, Hillary, and Obama said for the past 4 years. "Some troops will have to remain to protect the supply of oil and other vital national security interests" is how the elected Dems (Hillary's team, I believe) framed it.

[bvar22]

6. Out!.......NOW!

I voted for Obama, but I didn't give up my principles.
I opposed the Invasion.
I opposed the Occupation.
I opposed the FUNDING for the continued Occupation.
I oppose "residual forces" and "permanent bases".

I also STRONGLY oppose the escalation of the War/Occupation of Afghanistan.

I will NOT be quiet.

[Pastiche423]

7. I will not be quiet with you!

[bvar22]

8. !

:toast:

[Orwellian_Ghost]

9. The US-Iraq Deal Doesn't Bode Well

by Robert Dreyfuss on 11/27/2008 @ 1:15pm

Secular and nationalist opponents of the Baghdad regime of Nouri al-Maliki failed, and spectacularly so, to block the US-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), and their failure is not a surprise. The ruling alliance of Shiite religious parties and Kurds, who moved forward with the tacit support of Iran, steamrollered opposition to the accord, which passed with at least 144 votes out of 198 members of parliament in attendance.

"A huge number of members left the country, supposedly on hajj or for other reasons," said a leading Iraqi insider.

But, although the vote is a victory for Maliki, it says little about the future stability and security of the Iraqi state. And it says even less about the future of US-Iraq relations.

One important aspect of the back-and-forth among competing political blocs in advance of the vote is that Maliki felt compelled to make promises to the opposition about steps toward dealing with the many unresolved issues that threaten to explode Iraq in 2009.

<snip>

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/dreyfuss/386744/the_us_iraq_deal_doesn_t_bode_well

[mrreowwr_kittty]

10. This sucks. nt