Finally: Great News On Iraq!

MonstaThrilla

Golden Member
Sep 16, 2000
1,652
0
0
Bush and Blair Praise UN Plan For Iraq

WASHINGTON - President Bush, with a strong second from British Prime Minister Tony Blair, signaled support Friday for an interim government to take power in Iraq on June 30 and said the plan under development by a U.N. envoy is "broadly acceptable to the Iraqi people."

The authority of the coalition backed by the United States will expire on the June 30 deadline previously set, Bush said, adding that American- and British-dominated military forces "will remain in Iraq to help the new government succeed."

"U.N. will have a central role, as now, in developing the program and machinery for political transition to full Iraqi democracy," said Blair, adding that the two leaders would seek a new Security Council resolution to put the weight of the world body behind the shift.


Well, its finally great to see the political solution come to fruition that so many of us wanted all along. I'm sure there will be some stumbling blocks towards June 30, but things are looking alot brighter. Will it make Iraq safer for our troops? Unfortunately I don't think so. But its still great to see our country uniting with the UN in an effort to bring real hope for progress in Iraq.

Here's to President Bush :beer:
 

Spencer278

Diamond Member
Oct 11, 2002
3,637
0
0
I like that they don't even have a plan yet but it broadly acceptable to the Iraqi people.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: MonstaThrilla
Bush and Blair Praise UN Plan For Iraq

WASHINGTON - President Bush, with a strong second from British Prime Minister Tony Blair, signaled support Friday for an interim government to take power in Iraq on June 30 and said the plan under development by a U.N. envoy is "broadly acceptable to the Iraqi people."

The authority of the coalition backed by the United States will expire on the June 30 deadline previously set, Bush said, adding that American- and British-dominated military forces "will remain in Iraq to help the new government succeed."

"U.N. will have a central role, as now, in developing the program and machinery for political transition to full Iraqi democracy," said Blair, adding that the two leaders would seek a new Security Council resolution to put the weight of the world body behind the shift.


Well, its finally great to see the political solution come to fruition that so many of us wanted all along. I'm sure there will be some stumbling blocks towards June 30, but things are looking alot brighter. Will it make Iraq safer for our troops? Unfortunately I don't think so. But its still great to see our country uniting with the UN in an effort to bring real hope for progress in Iraq.

Here's to President Bush :beer:

What a difference a year makes, eh?
 

chrisms

Diamond Member
Mar 9, 2003
6,615
0
0
Fighters such as Sadr are not fighting just to give Iraqis their government back, their main goal is to rid the country of occupying forces. The forces will still be present on June 30, as will the escalating violence.
 

MonstaThrilla

Golden Member
Sep 16, 2000
1,652
0
0
Originally posted by: Spencer278
I like that they don't even have a plan yet but it broadly acceptable to the Iraqi people.

Don't be so cynical. From this statement from Brahimi made yesterday, I get the impression that this guy knows what he's doing:

My recommendations to the Secretary-General will be finalized only after our return to Iraq and after we conduct more consultations, with more people in Baghdad and elsewhere in this country.

I can, however, share with you a few thoughts, a few preliminary observations and a few still very tentative ideas we are discussing:

1. We believe that the present security situation makes it more important and more urgent for the political process to continue and we expect all stakeholders to re-double their efforts to ensure this process is successfully completed.

2. Let me emphasise from the outset that in this political process in Iraq, the elections scheduled to take place in January 2005 are the most important milestone. There is no substitute for the legitimacy that comes from free and fair elections. Therefore, Iraq will have a genuinely representative Government only after January 2005.

3. What the aim should be, at present, is to put in place a caretaker Government that will be in charge from 1st July 2004 until the elections in January 2005. We are confident that it will be possible to form such a Government in a timely manner, i.e. during the month of May 2004. We see it as a Government led by a Prime Minister and comprising Iraqi men and women known for their honesty, integrity and competence. There will also be a President to act as Head of State and two Vice-Presidents.

4. According to both the 15 November 2003 Agreement and the Transitional Administrative Law, the Governing Council, along with the CPA, will cease to exist on 30 June 2004. Some of its members are already assuming other responsibilities. Other members will no doubt be called upon to participate in various State institutions.

5. During our consultations, a very large number of our interlocutors suggested that a large National Conference should be convened. We see merit in this suggestion. It would serve the all-important aim of promoting national dialogue, consensus building and national reconciliation in Iraq. A preparatory Committee should be established soon to start the preparatory work and the Conference could take place soon after the restoration of sovereignty, in July 2004.

6. The National Conference would elect a Consultative Assembly to serve alongside the Government during the period leading to the elections of the National Assembly which, it is agreed, will take place in January 2005.

7. To return to the subject of elections, a U.N. electoral team has been in Baghdad for some time now. They are working diligently to help with the preparatory work for the January 2005 elections. They have visited some cities in the North and in the South. Like us, their movements are somewhat restricted at present by the prevailing security situation. But they remain confident that they can help out. But it is important and urgent that, on the Iraqi side, the necessary steps are taken, so that elections can take place at the appointed time in January 2005. Naturally, the security situation has to improve significantly for these elections to take place in an acceptable environment.

8. Last but not least, during our consultations, in February as well as at present, we heard of many grievances which need to be addressed. Detainees are held often without charge or trial. They should be either charged or released, and their families and lawyers must have access to them. The issue of former military personnel also needs attention. Furthermore, it is difficult to understand that thousands upon thousands of teachers, university professors, medical doctors and hospital staff, engineers and other professionals who are sorely needed, have been dismissed within the de-Baathification process, and far too many of those cases have yet to be reviewed.

True, not a full plan, but more of a preliminary outline. But since it seems Bush and Blair support this outline, the end result won't be terribly far off.
 

Spencer278

Diamond Member
Oct 11, 2002
3,637
0
0
Originally posted by: MonstaThrilla
Originally posted by: Spencer278
I like that they don't even have a plan yet but it broadly acceptable to the Iraqi people.

Don't be so cynical. From this statement from Brahimi made yesterday, I get the impression that this guy knows what he's doing:

My recommendations to the Secretary-General will be finalized only after our return to Iraq and after we conduct more consultations, with more people in Baghdad and elsewhere in this country.

I can, however, share with you a few thoughts, a few preliminary observations and a few still very tentative ideas we are discussing:

1. We believe that the present security situation makes it more important and more urgent for the political process to continue and we expect all stakeholders to re-double their efforts to ensure this process is successfully completed.

2. Let me emphasise from the outset that in this political process in Iraq, the elections scheduled to take place in January 2005 are the most important milestone. There is no substitute for the legitimacy that comes from free and fair elections. Therefore, Iraq will have a genuinely representative Government only after January 2005.

3. What the aim should be, at present, is to put in place a caretaker Government that will be in charge from 1st July 2004 until the elections in January 2005. We are confident that it will be possible to form such a Government in a timely manner, i.e. during the month of May 2004. We see it as a Government led by a Prime Minister and comprising Iraqi men and women known for their honesty, integrity and competence. There will also be a President to act as Head of State and two Vice-Presidents.

4. According to both the 15 November 2003 Agreement and the Transitional Administrative Law, the Governing Council, along with the CPA, will cease to exist on 30 June 2004. Some of its members are already assuming other responsibilities. Other members will no doubt be called upon to participate in various State institutions.

5. During our consultations, a very large number of our interlocutors suggested that a large National Conference should be convened. We see merit in this suggestion. It would serve the all-important aim of promoting national dialogue, consensus building and national reconciliation in Iraq. A preparatory Committee should be established soon to start the preparatory work and the Conference could take place soon after the restoration of sovereignty, in July 2004.

6. The National Conference would elect a Consultative Assembly to serve alongside the Government during the period leading to the elections of the National Assembly which, it is agreed, will take place in January 2005.

7. To return to the subject of elections, a U.N. electoral team has been in Baghdad for some time now. They are working diligently to help with the preparatory work for the January 2005 elections. They have visited some cities in the North and in the South. Like us, their movements are somewhat restricted at present by the prevailing security situation. But they remain confident that they can help out. But it is important and urgent that, on the Iraqi side, the necessary steps are taken, so that elections can take place at the appointed time in January 2005. Naturally, the security situation has to improve significantly for these elections to take place in an acceptable environment.

8. Last but not least, during our consultations, in February as well as at present, we heard of many grievances which need to be addressed. Detainees are held often without charge or trial. They should be either charged or released, and their families and lawyers must have access to them. The issue of former military personnel also needs attention. Furthermore, it is difficult to understand that thousands upon thousands of teachers, university professors, medical doctors and hospital staff, engineers and other professionals who are sorely needed, have been dismissed within the de-Baathification process, and far too many of those cases have yet to be reviewed.

True, not a full plan, but more of a preliminary outline. But since it seems Bush and Blair support this outline, the end result won't be terribly far off.

That outline basicly says they can will create goverment with at least 4 positions and that next year there will be elections.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
Originally posted by: conjur

What a difference a year makes, eh?

Absolutley :beer: How long did it take us to get a government in place and rebuild Germany again? What a difference a year makes.

rolleye.gif


That's not what I meant and you know it.

Bush discarded the UN completely last year and now, with his ass in deep sh*t, he's callling on the UN to help.
 
Jan 12, 2003
3,498
0
0
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
Originally posted by: conjur

What a difference a year makes, eh?

Absolutley :beer: How long did it take us to get a government in place and rebuild Germany again? What a difference a year makes.

rolleye.gif


That's not what I meant and you know it.

Oh, sorry...thought you expected, as Bush has said, 'Thomas Jefferson to appear in 6-months'?
 

tallest1

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2001
3,474
0
0
What the heck happened to Bush's "We don't want the UN telling us what to do!" stance? What a hypocrite. But yes, this is great great news.
 
Jan 12, 2003
3,498
0
0
Originally posted by: tallest1
What the heck happened to Bush's "We don't want the UN telling us what to do!" stance? What a hypocrite. But yes, this is great great news.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't, eh? He'll let the U.N. boggle this one up because all the baggy pants kids seem to think the U.N. is an end-all, cure-all for what ills the world...let's leave it to the U.N. to handle...this should be interesting...you asked for it, you got it...enjoy.
 

tallest1

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2001
3,474
0
0
Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
Originally posted by: tallest1
What the heck happened to Bush's "We don't want the UN telling us what to do!" stance? What a hypocrite. But yes, this is great great news.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't, eh? He'll let the U.N. boggle this one up because all the baggy pants kids seem to think the U.N. is an end-all, cure-all for what ills the world...let's leave it to the U.N. to handle...this should be interesting...you asked for it, you got it...enjoy.

Are you implying that you disagree with Bush's choice to take this route? Or have you been a UN-supporter in secret all along?
 
Jan 12, 2003
3,498
0
0
Originally posted by: tallest1
Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
Originally posted by: tallest1
What the heck happened to Bush's "We don't want the UN telling us what to do!" stance? What a hypocrite. But yes, this is great great news.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't, eh? He'll let the U.N. boggle this one up because all the baggy pants kids seem to think the U.N. is an end-all, cure-all for what ills the world...let's leave it to the U.N. to handle...this should be interesting...you asked for it, you got it...enjoy.

Are you implying that you disagree with Bush's choice to take this route? Or have you been a UN-supporter in secret all along?

Yes, I disagree with the choice; quite frankly, I disagree with a lot of the Bush appeasement policies.
 

MonstaThrilla

Golden Member
Sep 16, 2000
1,652
0
0
Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
Yes, I disagree with the choice; quite frankly, I disagree with a lot of the Bush appeasement policies.

The list of those is as long as the members list of the "Retarded Death Row Inmates For Bush" Club.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
Sorry guys, but this is really no news at all. Remember Bush is committed to signing off on Iraq. He has to so he can use it for his election campaign. My advice for pol watchers when evaluating Bush is to ask yourself how it can benefit his reelection.

He can now claim he is the international president, the war president, the liberator of Iraq, that he restored sovereignty to Iraq, etc.

He hasn't a clue (so he says) who will get the keys, but if he has to throw them to some 14 year old kid, he is going to so he can make the claim. Of course, the Bush backers here will claim victory and how great it is for that kid :p

Substance is nothing. It's all about appearance. If he can use the UN for publicity, he will, but we will be handing over nothing on June 30th of substance.

 

chess9

Elite member
Apr 15, 2000
7,748
0
0
Why haven't we heard a veritable cacophony of Iraqis givings support for Brahimi's proposal?

I have a feeling the other shoe will drop shortly, MonstaThrilla.

-Robert
 

Gaard

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2002
8,911
1
0
BUSH: Final question?

Q: Mr. President, if I could just ask you about Iraq again, the fact of the matter is that weapons of mass destruction have not been found and that a link between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida has not been proved and that a year on, troop numbers are coming up, not coming down. So however determined you are to make a better Iraq, isn't the awkward fact for both of you that you misled your peoples in taking troops to war and shedding blood as a result?

BLAIR: [Blair takes the question specifically addressed to Bush, then proceeds to filibuster.]

BUSH: Good job, prime minister.
 

etech

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
10,597
0
0
Originally posted by: chrisms
Fighters such as Sadr are not fighting just to give Iraqis their government back, their main goal is to rid the country of occupying forces. The forces will still be present on June 30, as will the escalating violence.

BS, they are fighting for power for their little group. They aren't fighting for the Iraqi people, they aren't fighting to "rid the country of occupying forces". They are fighting for power for themselves.

 

MegaWorks

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2004
3,819
1
0
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: chrisms
Fighters such as Sadr are not fighting just to give Iraqis their government back, their main goal is to rid the country of occupying forces. The forces will still be present on June 30, as will the escalating violence.

BS, they are fighting for power for their little group. They aren't fighting for the Iraqi people, they aren't fighting to "rid the country of occupying forces". They are fighting for power for themselves.

and who told you they are? Bush, All of these morons in the white house don't represent the Iraqi people.
 

seawolf21

Member
Feb 27, 2003
199
0
0
Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Sorry guys, but this is really no news at all. Remember Bush is committed to signing off on Iraq. He has to so he can use it for his election campaign. My advice for pol watchers when evaluating Bush is to ask yourself how it can benefit his reelection.

He can now claim he is the international president, the war president, the liberator of Iraq, that he restored sovereignty to Iraq, etc.

He hasn't a clue (so he says) who will get the keys, but if he has to throw them to some 14 year old kid, he is going to so he can make the claim. Of course, the Bush backers here will claim victory and how great it is for that kid :p

Substance is nothing. It's all about appearance. If he can use the UN for publicity, he will, but we will be handing over nothing on June 30th of substance.

Agreed. Jun 30 is more for Bush's election campaign. The day to day situation for Iraq is not going change on July 1. "Returning" power to the Iraqis is not worth the paper it is printed on. The new government has no power. The real power is still with the US military regardless of what Bush tells the voting public.