Home
Iraq's Maliki bear the responsibility of the survival of American
On: Sun 07/17/2011 5:47
deputy blamed for the Iraqi List headed by Iyad Allawi, al-Maliki responsible for the survival of U.S. forces or not, as commander of the armed forces, noting that his list is not concerned with the issue of the extension forces descend or withdrawal.
Salman said Jumaili told Kurdistan: "The Iraqi List is not concerned with the issue of extension of U.S. troops stay or not," noting that "this issue specifically, however, the Prime Minister as leader of the armed forces and therefore he must bear the responsibility alone."
He Jumaili: "It can not be President government to ask the other political blocs to present a position without knowing what the readiness of Iraqi forces or the fact that the security situation. "
He added: "The Iraqi List will not have answers only if we know what the government wants that have not decided so far do you want troops to stay or not, and what he wants the Americans? "
Iraq has signed and the United States in 2008, the Convention on the framework strategy to support the ministries and agencies of the Iraqi transition from a partnership strategy with the Republic of Iraq to the areas of economic, diplomatic, cultural and security, based on the strategic framework agreement and reduce the number of PRTs in the provinces , as well as provide an important sustainable rule of law, including police development program and the completion of the coordination and supervision and the report of the Fund of Iraq relief and reconstruction.
The agreement states that it should withdraw all U.S. forces from all territory and waters and airspace of Iraq not later than 31 December of the year the current 2011. In the United States combat forces pulled out of the cities, villages and towns of Iraq under the Convention at the end of June 2009.
The Minister of Defense of the new Leon Panetta said on July 11 evening, said his country's forces carried out individually military operations against Shiite militias in Iraq, after the passage of In the end U.S. combat operations formally. In August 2010 ended the U.S. military operations in Iraq and kept 50 thousand troops.
He was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Michael Mullen said during a visit to Baghdad on 22 April: "If the Iraqi government wished to discuss the possibility of the survival of some U.S. forces, I am sure that my government would welcome this dialogue. " The Iraqi government is trying to make a final decision with the participation of major political entities on this issue at a time holds politicians responsible for the Maliki government announced an official position. With Moqtada al-called Alsdralaracaan rare in a speech in Najaf to protest against the extension of the survival of U.S. forces in Iraq. And threatened the chest in April to lift a freeze, "Mahdi Army", the armed wing of the Sadrist movement, if it did not withdraw U.S. troops on schedule, after freezing its activities in August 2008 after bloody clashes with security forces in Karbala.
The region, which includes the building of the U.S. Embassy, and the building the Iraqi government, the Council of Representatives, and some ministries, and the homes of officials in the Iraqi state repeatedly to rocket attacks, and can not in most cases on U.S. and Iraqi forces identify the sources of its launch.
The U.S. military accuses Iran is providing material support for groups of armed Shia are periodically fired rockets and mortar shells at the Green Zone, targeting the U.S. Embassy premises.
and the newspaper "New York Times" that the government of Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, told American officials in secret they want to keep U.S. troops in Iraq after the end of this year, due date when the withdrawal of the rest of the troops, and told Americans their Iraqi counterparts secret, too, they want to stay, but the paper wonders under any conditions and the price paid by Americans who will stay there?
rise in the rate of death among Americans in Iraq in the recent period, is what is considered a bad omen of what will happen in the future if an agreement was reached to keep the troops there after the withdrawal date .. For the same Iraqi government that wants to keep the Americans, they turned a blind eye implicitly attacks by Shiite militias against U.S. forces by failing to respond aggressively to these attacks, as it did with the Sunni groups like al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia.
The paper, that the unwillingness of the Maliki government to curb rein in the militias or the inability to achieve this, adds an element to the debate, which focused until now on the capabilities of Iraqi security forces and domestic political considerations in Washington and Baghdad, not the safety of American soldiers.
criticized the U.S. officials of Iran has repeatedly in recent times, accusing it of arming militias that attack U.S. forces , but they did not renounce enough government complicity of Iraq.
and Michael Mullen, chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff, said last week that Iran is directly supporting hardline Shiite Muslim groups that kill U.S. troops in Iraq.
He added that any discussion with the Iraqi government on keeping troops in future should is in conjunction with the control of Iran in this regard.
The paper talked about the Iraqi judicial system of the factors that cause frustration for the Americans, as this system dominated by sectarian also, where hit the example of an incident recently in one of the towns of the province of Babylon, where the military unit U.S. to hand over three of the men who were planting a roadside bomb to the local judicial authorities.
The three were members of the Movement (battalion promised day) under the control of Shiite cleric Muqtada al-anti-American al-Sadr. The three men were acquitted after a trial that lasted only two hours, which was to prevent U.S. military officials from testifying.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
