Hassan M. Fattah, New York Times

Tuesday, November 22, 2005


Printable Version
Email This Article




Cairo -- For the first time, Iraq's political factions collectively
called for a timetable for withdrawal of foreign forces Monday as the
Bush administration battled pressure at home to commit to a pullout
schedule.

The announcement, at the conclusion of a reconciliation conference here
backed by the Arab League, was a public reaching-out by Shiites, who
now dominate Iraq's government, to Sunni Arabs on the eve of
parliamentary elections that have been put on shaky ground by weeks of
sectarian violence.

In Washington, Vice President Dick Cheney sought to damp down what has
become a bitter and personal fight in Washington over the Iraq war,
offering praise for a senior House Democrat who has called for the full
withdrawal of troops and saying that an "energetic debate" over the war
was part of a healthy society.

In Cairo, about 100 Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish leaders, many of whom
will run in the election on Dec. 15, signed a closing memorandum that
"demands a withdrawal of foreign troops on a specified timetable,
dependent on an immediate national program for rebuilding the security
forces."

The statement said: "The Iraqi people are looking forward to the day
when foreign forces will leave Iraq, when its armed and security forces
will be rebuilt, and when they can enjoy peace and stability and an end
to terrorism."

Shiite leaders have long maintained that a pullout should be done
according to milestones and not before Iraqi security forces are fully
operational. The closing statement upheld a Sunni demand for a pullout
while preserving aspects of Shiite demands, but it did not specify when
a withdrawal should begin, making it more of a symbolic gesture than a
concrete agenda item that could be followed up by the Iraqi government.


The statement, while condemning the wave of terrorism that has engulfed
Iraq, also broadly acknowledged a general right to resist foreign
occupation. This was another effort to compromise with Sunnis who have
sought to legitimize the insurgency. The statement condemned terror
attacks and religious backing for them. It also demanded the release of
innocent prisoners and an investigation into allegations of torture

On 22 Nov 2005 07:31:45 -0800, cut'n'pasted the
following:

The statement said: "The Iraqi people are looking forward to the day
when foreign forces will leave Iraq, when its armed and security forces
will be rebuilt, and when they can enjoy peace and stability and an end
to terrorism."


As are we.


Shiite leaders have long maintained that a pullout should be done
according to milestones and not before Iraqi security forces are fully
operational. The closing statement upheld a Sunni demand for a pullout
while preserving aspects of Shiite demands, but it did not specify when
a withdrawal should begin, making it more of a symbolic gesture than a
concrete agenda item that could be followed up by the Iraqi government.


"Symbolic" - darn.


The statement, while condemning the wave of terrorism that has engulfed
Iraq, also broadly acknowledged a general right to resist foreign
occupation. This was another effort to compromise with Sunnis who have
sought to legitimize the insurgency. The statement condemned terror
attacks and religious backing for them. It also demanded the release of
innocent prisoners and an investigation into allegations of torture

Both of the latter should be done.

Sounds like the Iraqi's are getting their heads rightly screwed on! Thank
God for all the help they've gotten from us.
--
John H

"It's *not* a baby kicking, beautiful bride, it's only a fetus!"

A Famous Hypocrite

John H. wrote:
On 22 Nov 2005 07:31:45 -0800, cut'n'pasted the
following:

The statement said: "The Iraqi people are looking forward to the day
when foreign forces will leave Iraq, when its armed and security forces
will be rebuilt, and when they can enjoy peace and stability and an end
to terrorism."


As are we.


Shiite leaders have long maintained that a pullout should be done
according to milestones and not before Iraqi security forces are fully
operational. The closing statement upheld a Sunni demand for a pullout
while preserving aspects of Shiite demands, but it did not specify when
a withdrawal should begin, making it more of a symbolic gesture than a
concrete agenda item that could be followed up by the Iraqi government.


"Symbolic" - darn.


The statement, while condemning the wave of terrorism that has engulfed
Iraq, also broadly acknowledged a general right to resist foreign
occupation. This was another effort to compromise with Sunnis who have
sought to legitimize the insurgency. The statement condemned terror
attacks and religious backing for them. It also demanded the release of
innocent prisoners and an investigation into allegations of torture

Both of the latter should be done.

Sounds like the Iraqi's are getting their heads rightly screwed on! Thank
God for all the help they've gotten from us.

Yes, thank God we've decimated there infrastructure, killed their
husbands, wives, and children. Thank God that we are trying to instill
life style values on them that they are totally against. What's next,
force them to eat McDonald's while reciting from the Bible?

Kevin,
What lifestyle values are we forcing on them, that the majority resent? It
appears that a minority of insurgents, both Iraqis and non Iraqis are trying
to force their values on the majority.


wrote in message
ups.com...

John H. wrote:
On 22 Nov 2005 07:31:45 -0800, cut'n'pasted the
following:

The statement said: "The Iraqi people are looking forward to the day
when foreign forces will leave Iraq, when its armed and security forces
will be rebuilt, and when they can enjoy peace and stability and an end
to terrorism."


As are we.


Shiite leaders have long maintained that a pullout should be done
according to milestones and not before Iraqi security forces are fully
operational. The closing statement upheld a Sunni demand for a pullout
while preserving aspects of Shiite demands, but it did not specify when
a withdrawal should begin, making it more of a symbolic gesture than a
concrete agenda item that could be followed up by the Iraqi government.


"Symbolic" - darn.


The statement, while condemning the wave of terrorism that has engulfed
Iraq, also broadly acknowledged a general right to resist foreign
occupation. This was another effort to compromise with Sunnis who have
sought to legitimize the insurgency. The statement condemned terror
attacks and religious backing for them. It also demanded the release of
innocent prisoners and an investigation into allegations of torture

Both of the latter should be done.

Sounds like the Iraqi's are getting their heads rightly screwed on! Thank
God for all the help they've gotten from us.

Yes, thank God we've decimated there infrastructure, killed their
husbands, wives, and children. Thank God that we are trying to instill
life style values on them that they are totally against. What's next,
force them to eat McDonald's while reciting from the Bible?

Sir Rodney Smithers wrote:
Kevin,
What lifestyle values are we forcing on them, that the majority resent? It
appears that a minority of insurgents, both Iraqis and non Iraqis are trying
to force their values on the majority.

I'm not Kevin, idiot.