Majority Of Iraqi Legislators Call For Timetable For U.S. Withdrawal

In a letter to Congress, dovetailing with yesterday's testimony before the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on International Organizations, Human Rights and Oversight, thirty-one Iraqi legislators, representing a majority of the Iraq Parliament, have expressed "widespread disapproval of the proposed U.S.-Iraq security agreement if it does not include a specific timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. military troops."

We, the undersigned members of the council, wish to confirm your concerns that any international agreement that is not ratified by the Iraqi legislative power is considered unconstitutional and illegal, in accordance with the current rulings and laws of the Iraqi Republic. Furthermore, any treaty, agreement or "executive agreement" that is signed between Iraq and the United States will not be legal and will not enter the stage of implementation without first being ratified by the Council of Representatives, in accordance with Article 61 of Section Four of the Iraqi constitution, which gives the Iraqi government's legislative power, represented by the Council of Representatives, the exclusive right to ratify international treaties and agreements.

Likewise, we wish to inform you that the majority of Iraqi representatives strongly reject any military-security, economic, commercial, agricultural, investment or political agreement with the United States that is not linked to clear mechanisms that obligate the occupying American military forces to fully withdraw from Iraq, in accordance with a declared timetable and without leaving behind any military bases, soldiers or hired fighters.

The chorus of disapproval is of substantial consequence, as it will require a two-thirds majority of the Iraqi Council of Representatives to ratify the security agreement that is currently being hashed out by Iraq and the United States. Congressman Bill Delahunt, who impaneled yesterday's hearings, has co-sponsored a bill with Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro that "bars funding for any agreement that has not been approved by Congress."

Comments

[MalamuteMan]

Hearing this I am sure Dick Cheney's comment will be, "So???"

[serena1313]

This is not the first time the majority of the Council voted for a timetable. Likewise the majority of Iraqis want the US out. al-Sadr has called for a timetable since the beginning which explains Bush wanting al-Sadr killed or captured.

When the violence first began escalating in Iraq Rummy blamed al-Sadr purporting his newspaper was advocating violence. (it wasn't) Nevertheless Rummy shut the paper down. At that point Bremer was attempting to privatize Iraq's nationally-owned businesses. Simultaneously corporations were moving-in with workers from neighbouring countries while Iraqis were starving and wanted to work. al-Sadr's newspaper was reporting on those events. It is not as if Iraqis were not already informed, but Bush needed a bogeyman.

Iraqis do not want a foreign presence occupying their country including the US, American corporations and al-Qaeda. Iraq belongs to the Iraqi people. Give it back. Until we do there will be no real peace.

[JiminNC]

And they shall have it soon.

[MajorKong]

Silly Iraqis. Acting like they're a sovereign nation or something.

[KillTheMessenger]

Another democratic vote the US should take more seriously... for its own sake.

[Raymondf]

Send 2/3rds home put one third on the afghanistan border with pakistan, and fin Osama.

[Raymondf]

If Iraqi's want us out Bush should have all out by August 1st.

[speakeasy]

No matter how much we want freedom and Democracy for Iraqis we cant want it more than they want it for themselves.
No matter how much we want freedom and Democracy for Iraqis we cant want it more than they want it for themselves.
No matter how much we want freedom and Democracy for Iraqis we cant want it more than they want it for themselves.
No matter how much we want freedom and Democracy for Iraqis we cant want it more than they want it for themselves.
No matter how much we want freedom and Democracy for Iraqis we cant want it more than they want it for themselves.

[jfor]

Who thinks we want freedom and democracy for Iraqis? Are you kidding me?

[realityczech4u]

Whether we do or don't want it for them, they don't really want it for themselves and are too primitive a society to exist under democracy. Civil war will ensue. They cannot control themselves and their rivalries. Sunny muslims will be killing cloudy muslims and the kurds can forget about it. The only way they can be kept under control is by someone like Saddam who was willing to murder, torture and electrocute the troublemakers. We should give them what they want.

[musselmanm]

The Iraqis' have been asking us to leave for awhile now. Anyone remeber President Al-Malarki telling us that they had it under control just before we had to bail them out in Basra, I believe it was.
I am in favor of the self rule for Iraq. This was the object of our unending occupation.
Just as we must with our toddlers, we must let go someday. They may get hurt but what does not destroy them will make them stronger.
We brought this freedom directly to them and now we want to keep them from self rule.
Same thing with Palastine.
We can't let George McCain rule Iraq for the next 4-100 years. Let the Iraqis' get on with it.

[nerakami]

Why is this not blasted on every news channel. This is MAJOR news!!!

[dadw5boys]

RIGHT WING MEDIA STILL IN CONTROL???

[nerakami]

Well, well, well.... what will poor McCain have to say now. His arguments are being debunked by the very leaders he is touting need the US soldiers for 100 years.

This is irony at it's maximum best....

[musselmanm]

This must be American, Obama Bullshit! John McKill will never allow Iraq to make us surrender. As he has said very clearly, I will never ever, never, ever surrender, never I say get him a MOAB and a B-52 send him over the country of his choice and make him ride it to the ground.
don't start a war without him!

[dadw5boys]

Surrender?

We are being ask to leave just like in Thialand, Phillipines, and so many other places.

Don't worry the CIA is busy in South America we can send soldiers there soon.

[christieZ]

Let's get the fuck out.

[research]

Stupid Democratic Surrender monkeys!

What? ...Iraqi...

Never mind.

[Chavez08]

At least the post-Versailles Germans had a reason to become murderous nationalist psychos. Bush followers seem to War Monger just for fun.

Moral here: Don't let your kids near the paint chips!

[Raymondf]

I am a Neo-Con of gigantic proportions. Research your wrong. The government has been trying to find a graceful way of getting out. Here's our chance. If the majority of the Iraqi government want us out. Go. Send all of the troops home. Then use 10,000 fresh troops along with the Afghan Army, and saturate the border with Pakistan, and flush out Bin Laden. get back to fighting the war on terror. The Afghanistan government is the only true friend we have over there including the Saudi's whom I've never trusted, because I think Saudi oil money, and Iran are suppling money and weapons to the terrorist organizations. Now is the chance bring them home.

[hunt49]

A true neo-con would advocate moving on to the next 'domino' and toppling it with democracy -- at sword-point, of course. Are you breaking ranks? Come on, man, lock-step with the 'patriots'. Get that flag pin back on your lapel.

But thanks for the suggestion that we get back on task, were we should have stayed in the first place. That, I agree with.

[Raymondf]

Why do you think will not let us have any American troops in their country. Think people.

[blueshield]

WTF! D**n this liberal appeaser traitor blame-America-first cut-and-run spineless surrendering Iraqi Parliament! Who the heck put these islamofacists in power?

Timetables? TIMETABLES FOR WITHDRAWAL!? Don't they know the SURGE is working?

We need some REGIME CHANGE we can believe in!