Iraq Leader Omits A Bit In Lauding U.S. Pullout

[John317]

Iraq Leader Omits a Bit in Lauding U.S. Pullout

By ROD NORDLAND and MARC SANTORA

Published: June 11, 2009

BAGHDAD — Iraq’s civilian leaders held a meeting on Thursday with the 300 top Iraqi military commanders from around the country to discuss the withdrawal of American forces from cities by the June 30 deadline, and scarcely mentioned the United States.

“Foreign forces have to withdraw from the cities totally,” said Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki. “This is a victory that should be celebrated in feasts and festivals.”

It was the first time so many commanders had gathered in Baghdad to meet Mr. Maliki, who in recent months has styled himself as commander in chief, a post not mentioned in the Iraqi Constitution. The defense minister, in his preliminary remarks, referred to Mr. Maliki repeatedly as his “master” and “commander in chief,” as did other speakers.

Iraqi and foreign reporters were invited, but when a senior American military officer arrived, a major general from Mr. Maliki’s Office of the Commander in Chief told him to leave. “We apologize to you, but this is an Iraqi meeting and you’re not invited,” the general said. Neither officer would give his name.

Defense Minister Abdul-Kader Jassem al-Obeidi gave an opening speech reviewing the progress of Iraqi security forces ahead of the United States withdrawal.

“Some people used to say that Iraq is nothing but the Green Zone, which could fall at any time,” he said. “Blood was flowing in the streets of Baghdad.”

Now, he said, Iraqi forces have things so well in hand that hundreds of commanders can safely come to the capital. The defense minister managed to avoid any mention of Americans, multinational troops or even “foreign forces.”

“Even though there was no mention of the Americans,” said a colonel with the National Police, Karim Awda, “this meeting was all about them.”

Brig. Gen. Karim Falhan said, “It shows we can handle it now ourselves, we can take over.”

Some American military officers have expressed concern recently about overconfidence among Iraqi political leaders. The country’s security forces still are heavily dependent on the Americans for logistics, technical support and, in many areas, training. The officers worry that the prime minister has not prepared the Iraqi public for the continued presence of Americans in the cities as trainers, advisers and, upon request, support troops, said a high-ranking officer who did not want to be quoted by name on a political matter.

Mr. Maliki’s careful avoidance of the topic of his government’s continued dependence is clearly a political gambit as he positions himself for Iraq’s national elections in January, and American officials do not believe it reflects any personal enmity toward the Americans.

In an interview later, the head of the Iraqi air force, Gen. Anwar Hama Ameen, said rebuilding it would take much longer than the two and a half years the Americans are scheduled to remain here. “Building an air force needs a long-term program,” he said. “I cannot estimate how long we will need before we can control our airspace without American support.”

No such reservations were expressed at the commanders’ meeting.

Mr. Maliki did, however, warn the officers against complacency in the fight against remaining terrorists. “They will try to increase their threat as the American forces withdraw from the cities,” he said, the only reference to the United States in 61 minutes of speeches on its withdrawal. “These terrorist operations are going to increase as we make our way toward the elections.”

The event was held at Al Rashid Hotel. Electricity in the meeting hall failed twice during the session.

In an interview outside, Interior Minister Jawad al-Bolani, whose speech also did not mention American forces, said that was only because the leaders wanted to congratulate the Iraqi commanders.

“It was a chance for the commanders to see their leaders, raise their spirits and contribute to their morale,” he said. “The American forces still have a very big role, and they’ve made lots of sacrifices to help bring this land to security and stability.”

The tenor of the meeting reminded many of similar ones between Saddam Hussein and his commanders, which featured fawning speeches by underlings praising him, the use of the word “master” when addressing him, and a recitation by a nationalist poet. In Thursday’s case, the poem was a recent one denouncing terrorism.

Shortly before Mr. Maliki’s speech, a loud blast could be heard from the other side of the Tigris River. There were at least three other bombings in the capital as well on Thursday, including an explosively formed projectile, a particularly deadly type of roadside bomb made with Iranian technology.

That blast came in the midst of a military press tour of Sadr City to show the dismantling of an Iraqi-American security station. The explosion tossed a heavily armored vehicle carrying reporters into the air, killing an Iraqi bystander and wounding another, according to Maj. Geoffrey Norman, who was in the convoy.

An American soldier in the turret was thrown from the vehicle, sustaining minor wounds. No one else was hurt inside the vehicle, a model known as MRAP, for mine-resistant, ambush-protected. Brig. Gen. Stephen Lanza, the American military’s spokesman, was clear about why he invited reporters to visit the security base closing.

“We want you to see that we are moving out of the city,” he said.

Abeer Mohammed contributed reporting.

[Dr. Shane]

When it is all over Iraq is going to owe a huge debt to the US. Let's hope the propagandists don't convince them all that we somehow did more harm than good.

[John317]

When it is all over Iraq is going to owe a huge debt to the US.

Yes, indeed, they do. No doubt they will express this in private.

It's true that the US government helped them because it was beneficial to our own nation, but many Americans also took part in helping them simply because Americans felt sorry for them for their years of suffering under a brutal dictator and wanted to see them gain their freedom and succeed.

[Dr. Shane]

The US wants to see more democracies because more democracies means less wars. When the people elect the leaders the leaders are less likely to start wars with their neighbors. So helping Iraq become a democracy should serve to create more peace in the area. However democracy is susceptible to corruption and a corrupt democracy can become a dictatorship in disguise.

[carolaa]

The US wants to see more democracies because more democracies means less wars. When the people elect the leaders the leaders are less likely to start wars with their neighbors. So helping Iraq become a democracy should serve to create more peace in the area.

Do you have any research to back that up?

[Ted Oplinger]

Hmmm...and we've been told all along we've been losing that war; it was already lost, declared certain political figures.

Those troops will be quietly funneled over to Afghanistan, with no mention of success for what was derisively termed "Bush's War".

Question: Can the current administration repeat in Afghanistan what Bush '43 did in Iraq?

Rolling....

[John317]

Hmmm...and we've been told all along we've been losing that war; it was already lost, declared certain political figures.

Those troops will be quietly funneled over to Afghanistan, with no mention of success for what was derisively termed "Bush's War".

I have a feeling that you're probably right, sad to say.

Quote:

Question: Can the current administration repeat in Afghanistan what Bush '43 did in Iraq?

I sure hope so. I want to see Afghanistan succeed as a democratic state free from dictatorial, extremist groups such as the Taliban.