U.S. Signals Iraq's Maliki Should Go !

[DinarThug]

CNN. Broadcasting While Calling For Take Out And Ordering A Wannabe Dictator To Go !

 

 

 

U.S. Signals Iraq's Maliki Should Go
The White House Is Convinced the Shiite Leader Is Unable to Reconcile With the Nation's Sunni Minority and Stabilize a Volatile Political Landscape.

WASHINGTON—The Obama administration is signaling that it wants a new government in Iraq without Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, convinced the Shiite leader is unable to reconcile with the nation's Sunni minority and stabilize a volatile political landscape.

The U.S. administration is indicating it wants Iraq's political parties to form a new government without Mr. Maliki as he tries to assemble a ruling coalition following elections this past April, U.S. officials say.

Such a new government, U.S., officials say, would include the country's Sunni and Kurdish communities and could help to stem Sunni support for the al Qaeda offshoot, the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, or ISIS, that has seized control of Iraqi cities over the past two weeks. That, the officials argue, would help to unify the country and reverse its slide into sectarian division.

On Wednesday, Iraq stepped up efforts on several fronts to blunt the insurgency's progress, deploying counterterrorism units and helicopter gunships to battle them for control of the country's main oil refinery, in Beiji.

A growing number of U.S. lawmakers and Arab allies, particularly Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, are pressing the White House to pull its support for Mr. Maliki. Some of them are pushing for change in exchange for providing their help in stabilizing Iraq, say U.S. and Arab diplomats.

The chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.) told a congressional hearing Wednesday: "The Maliki government, candidly, has got to go if you want any reconciliation."

Senior administration officials have become increasingly critical of Mr. Maliki in their public statements and question whether he is committed to mending ties with Sunnis.

"There's no question that not enough has been done by the government, including the prime minister, to govern inclusively, and that that has contributed to the situation and the crisis that we have today in Iraq," White House spokesman Jay Carney said Wednesday. "The Iraqi people will have to decide the makeup of the next coalition government and who is the prime minister," he added. "Whether it's the current prime minister or another leader, we will aggressively attempt to impress upon that leader the absolute necessity of rejecting sectarian governance."

The Obama administration has for years warned Mr. Maliki's Shiite-dominant government to be more inclusive and less punitive against the minority Sunnis at the risk of further alienating them.

Mr. Maliki has largely ignored that advice over the past five years, U.S. and Arab officials say, jailing popular Sunni protest leaders, blocking even other Shiite blocs from sharing power and taking most key cabinet positions in government for himself.

This week, as pressure rose from the U.S. and other allies to work toward a representative government for Iraq, Mr. Maliki participated in a unity meeting with top Sunni, Shiite, Kurdish leaders. The result wasn't hopeful, U.S. and Arab officials say.

"We believe that Maliki's sectarianism and exclusion of Sunnis has led to the insurgency we are seeing," said a senior Arab official. "He unfortunately managed to unite ISIS with the former Baathists and Saddam supporters."

President Barack Obama and his national security aides are in deliberations over the creation of a new strategy for stabilizing Iraq, with a clear roadmap expected in the coming days.

Mr. Obama has discussed the possibility of using air power and drone strikes to weaken ISIS, say U.S. officials. But he has been particularly focused on developing a political process to heal the widening rift between Iraq's Shiite and Sunni communities that officials see as feeding the support for ISIS's insurgency in western Iraq.

Mr. Obama met Wednesday with the top Republican and Democratic members of the House and Senate to update them on administration plans.

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.), the chamber's minority leader, issued a statement afterward, criticizing Mr. Obama's past policies on Iraq and saying it was important to apply the experience to the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in two years.

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.), the House Democratic leader, said Mr. Obama didn't need any further legislative authority to pursue options in Iraq. But officials said Mr. Obama told the congressional leaders he would continue to consult with them.

Earlier Wednesday, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, cautioned senators at a hearing against expecting quick U.S. military strikes, because of the difficulty of developing targets. "It's not as easy as looking at an iPhone video of a convoy and then immediately striking it," said Gen. Dempsey.

To support the administration approach, Secretary of State John Kerry and his aides have consulted with Iraq's neighbors—particularly Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Iran—to find a formula to create a more inclusive government in Baghdad.

The State Department's point man on Iraq, Deputy Assistant Secretary Brett McGurk, has concurrently been meeting with Iraqi politicians and religious leaders in Baghdad to promote this political process, say U.S. officials.

The State Department wouldn't say if the Obama administration was specifically discussing the issue of removing Mr. Maliki during these talks. But Arab diplomats and policy advisors who have talked with the White House in recent days said it was clear the administration was "casting about for somebody better" than Mr. Maliki.

Mr. Kerry was even more pointed in his criticism of Mr. Maliki on Monday, arguing his removal could help stabilize Iraq's sectarian divide.

"If there is a clear successor, if the results of the election are respected, if people come together with the cohesiveness necessary to build a legitimate government that puts the reforms in place that people want, that might wind up being very salutatory," he told Yahoo! News.

Mr. Maliki's State of Law Party won a plurality of seats, 94 out of 350, in Iraq's parliamentary elections. The country is waiting for Iraq's Supreme Court to ratify the results, after which the parliamentary speaker will call on the leadership of Mr. Maliki's party to form a new government.

Mr. Maliki is still viewed as in a strong position to retain his post. In fact, many Shiite leaders have rallied behind the Iraqi prime minister in the wake of the ISIS gaining control of the cities of Mosul, Tal Afar and Tikrit in recent days and launching an offensive on Baghdad.

Still, the formation of governments in Iraq has seen significant horse-trading—and the involvement of American, Iranian and Arab diplomats—since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein in 2003.

The Shiite politician Ayad Allawi's political party won the most seats in 2010. But he failed to form a government after some Shiite and Kurdish parties backed Mr. Maliki.

Current and former U.S. officials said Iran will be crucial a player in efforts to form a new government in Baghdad and potentially remove Mr. Maliki, and will push for any new government to be friendly to its interests.

Tehran and Washington are Iraq's most important diplomatic, economic and military partners. And both the U.S. and Iran have pledged in recent days to support the Iraqi government in its fight against the ISIS.

Former U.S. officials said both the George W. Bush and Obama administrations communicated regularly with Iranian diplomats in Baghdad during the political deliberation in 2006 and 2010 that previously elected Mr. Maliki. Deputy Secretary of State William Burns discussed Iraq's political reform process with Iranian officials on Monday in Vienna, according to the State Department.

"Iran can play a positive role," said Zalmay Khalilzad, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq from 2005 to 2007. "Sometimes, on a tactical level, there can be an opportunity for cooperation. It's happened in the past."

The sequencing of the U.S.'s deliberations with Iraq and Iran will be crucial in determining whether progress can be made in driving ISIS out of the territories it's already claimed, according current and former U.S. officials.

Mr. Obama has signaled that he's going to hold back on launching any major military operations inside Iraq until he get assurances from the Iraqi government that it will take meaningful steps to reach out to its Sunni community.

But there are concerns within the administration that ISIS could continue to make military gains as Mr. Maliki and other Iraqi politicians jostle for power in Baghdad.

"The question is if the U.S. needs to do something [militarily] while waiting for a political settlement," said Mr. Khalilzad.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/u-s-signals-1403137521

[dinar_millions]

Looks like a SOFA agreement is coming after this is over...

[DinarThug]

Obama Is SOFA King Slow !

 

         

[calkid11]

Thank you

[sandfly]

THANKS

[jobug38]

He was waiting on the troops immunity before going in and kicking a$$. They have it now. Immunity is part of the SOFA agreement isn't it?

Edited June 19, 2014 by jobug38

[aaanth]

18 June 2014

 

 

 

 

U.S. Signals Iraq's Maliki Should Go

 

The White House Is Convinced the Shiite Leader Is Unable to Reconcile With the Nation's Sunni Minority and Stabilize a Volatile Political Landscape.

 

 

WASHINGTON—The Obama administration is signaling that it wants a new government in Iraq without Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, convinced the Shiite leader is unable to reconcile with the nation's Sunni minority and stabilize a volatile political landscape.

 

 

The U.S. administration is indicating it wants Iraq's political parties to form a new government without Mr. Maliki as he tries to assemble a ruling coalition following elections this past April, U.S. officials say.

 

 

Such a new government, U.S., officials say, would include the country's Sunni and Kurdish communities and could help to stem Sunni support for the al Qaeda offshoot, the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, or ISIS, that has seized control of Iraqi cities over the past two weeks. That, the officials argue, would help to unify the country and reverse its slide into sectarian division.

 

 

On Wednesday, Iraq stepped up efforts on several fronts to blunt the insurgency's progress, deploying counterterrorism units and helicopter gunships to battle them for control of the country's main oil refinery, in Beiji.

 

 

A growing number of U.S. lawmakers and Arab allies, particularly Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, are pressing the White House to pull its support for Mr. Maliki. Some of them are pushing for change in exchange for providing their help in stabilizing Iraq, say U.S. and Arab diplomats.

 

 

The chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.) told a congressional hearing Wednesday: "The Maliki government, candidly, has got to go if you want any reconciliation."

 

 

Senior administration officials have become increasingly critical of Mr. Maliki in their public statements and question whether he is committed to mending ties with Sunnis.

 

 

"There's no question that not enough has been done by the government, including the prime minister, to govern inclusively, and that that has contributed to the situation and the crisis that we have today in Iraq," White House spokesman Jay Carney said Wednesday. "The Iraqi people will have to decide the makeup of the next coalition government and who is the prime minister," he added. "Whether it's the current prime minister or another leader, we will aggressively attempt to impress upon that leader the absolute necessity of rejecting sectarian governance."

 

 

The Obama administration has for years warned Mr. Maliki's Shiite-dominant government to be more inclusive and less punitive against the minority Sunnis at the risk of further alienating them.

 

 

Mr. Maliki has largely ignored that advice over the past five years, U.S. and Arab officials say, jailing popular Sunni protest leaders, blocking even other Shiite blocs from sharing power and taking most key cabinet positions in government for himself.

 

 

This week, as pressure rose from the U.S. and other allies to work toward a representative government for Iraq, Mr. Maliki participated in a unity meeting with top Sunni, Shiite, Kurdish leaders. The result wasn't hopeful, U.S. and Arab officials say.

 

 

"We believe that Maliki's sectarianism and exclusion of Sunnis has led to the insurgency we are seeing," said a senior Arab official. "He unfortunately managed to unite ISIS with the former Baathists and Saddam supporters."

 

 

President Barack Obama and his national security aides are in deliberations over the creation of a new strategy for stabilizing Iraq, with a clear roadmap expected in the coming days.

 

 

Mr. Obama has discussed the possibility of using air power and drone strikes to weaken ISIS, say U.S. officials. But he has been particularly focused on developing a political process to heal the widening rift between Iraq's Shiite and Sunni communities that officials see as feeding the support for ISIS's insurgency in western Iraq.

 

 

Mr. Obama met Wednesday with the top Republican and Democratic members of the House and Senate to update them on administration plans.

 

 

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.), the chamber's minority leader, issued a statement afterward, criticizing Mr. Obama's past policies on Iraq and saying it was important to apply the experience to the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in two years.

 

 

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.), the House Democratic leader, said Mr. Obama didn't need any further legislative authority to pursue options in Iraq. But officials said Mr. Obama told the congressional leaders he would continue to consult with them.

 

 

Earlier Wednesday, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, cautioned senators at a hearing against expecting quick U.S. military strikes, because of the difficulty of developing targets. "It's not as easy as looking at an iPhone video of a convoy and then immediately striking it," said Gen. Dempsey.

 

 

To support the administration approach, Secretary of State John Kerry and his aides have consulted with Iraq's neighbors—particularly Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Iran—to find a formula to create a more inclusive government in Baghdad.

 

 

The State Department's point man on Iraq, Deputy Assistant Secretary Brett McGurk, has concurrently been meeting with Iraqi politicians and religious leaders in Baghdad to promote this political process, say U.S. officials.

 

 

The State Department wouldn't say if the Obama administration was specifically discussing the issue of removing Mr. Maliki during these talks. But Arab diplomats and policy advisors who have talked with the White House in recent days said it was clear the administration was "casting about for somebody better" than Mr. Maliki.

 

 

Mr. Kerry was even more pointed in his criticism of Mr. Maliki on Monday, arguing his removal could help stabilize Iraq's sectarian divide.

 

 

"If there is a clear successor, if the results of the election are respected, if people come together with the cohesiveness necessary to build a legitimate government that puts the reforms in place that people want, that might wind up being very salutatory," he told Yahoo! News.

 

 

Mr. Maliki's State of Law Party won a plurality of seats, 94 out of 350, in Iraq's parliamentary elections. The country is waiting for Iraq's Supreme Court to ratify the results, after which the parliamentary speaker will call on the leadership of Mr. Maliki's party to form a new government.

 

 

Mr. Maliki is still viewed as in a strong position to retain his post. In fact, many Shiite leaders have rallied behind the Iraqi prime minister in the wake of the ISIS gaining control of the cities of Mosul, Tal Afar and Tikrit in recent days and launching an offensive on Baghdad.

 

 

Still, the formation of governments in Iraq has seen significant horse-trading—and the involvement of American, Iranian and Arab diplomats—since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein in 2003.

 

 

The Shiite politician Ayad Allawi's political party won the most seats in 2010. But he failed to form a government after some Shiite and Kurdish parties backed Mr. Maliki.

 

 

Current and former U.S. officials said Iran will be crucial a player in efforts to form a new government in Baghdad and potentially remove Mr. Maliki, and will push for any new government to be friendly to its interests.

 

 

Tehran and Washington are Iraq's most important diplomatic, economic and military partners. And both the U.S. and Iran have pledged in recent days to support the Iraqi government in its fight against the ISIS.

 

 

Former U.S. officials said both the George W. Bush and Obama administrations communicated regularly with Iranian diplomats in Baghdad during the political deliberation in 2006 and 2010 that previously elected Mr. Maliki. Deputy Secretary of State William Burns discussed Iraq's political reform process with Iranian officials on Monday in Vienna, according to the State Department.

 

 

"Iran can play a positive role," said Zalmay Khalilzad, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq from 2005 to 2007. "Sometimes, on a tactical level, there can be an opportunity for cooperation. It's happened in the past."

 

 

The sequencing of the U.S.'s deliberations with Iraq and Iran will be crucial in determining whether progress can be made in driving ISIS out of the territories it's already claimed, according current and former U.S. officials.

 

 

Mr. Obama has signaled that he's going to hold back on launching any major military operations inside Iraq until he get assurances from the Iraqi government that it will take meaningful steps to reach out to its Sunni community.

 

 

But there are concerns within the administration that ISIS could continue to make military gains as Mr. Maliki and other Iraqi politicians jostle for power in Baghdad.

 

 

"The question is if the U.S. needs to do something [militarily] while waiting for a political settlement," said Mr. Khalilzad.

 

 

 

www.wsj.com

[sandfly]

THANKS

[Rayzur]

He was waiting on the troops immunity before going in and kicking a$$. They have it now. Immunity is part of the SOFA agreement isn't it?

 

Ya know I genuinely  can not for the life of me figure out why McCain of ALL people, along with whoever else is in the chorus.... why he is saying we should have stayed, when there was no way we were going to be given immunity if we had. Why is that okay with him that I or anyone else would no longer be protected under US jurisdiction and the UCMJ as military who are sent there as US soldiers? I honestly don't get why he's mumbling about we should a stayed ..... when that would have put every single military person under the jurisdiction of Iraq (had we stayed)???....Why is that okay with ANY legislator??? But hey, I'm all about the mission, so I'll be right there.... behind every legislator demanding we should still be there... and I'll make sure they are front and center in the action.......

 

I'm not real up on the latest agreements JoBug... did we sign a new one with Iraq? The SOFA I'm aware of was with regard to the draw down of US troops in Iraq, to be concluded Dec 2011....I was not aware that this would some how extend past that agreement (meaning immunity for US military==> remain under UCMJ).... or that a new one has been signed.... Per that SOFA agreement, all contractors etc civilians are there at their own risk as they fall under the jurisdiction of Iraq and not the US (unless we signed something new?) And the troops (Marines) being sent there now (as announced officially), are there to support the Embassy, which comes under US jurisdiction as US sovereign soil....

 

If we send in planes with pilots and they are shot down, then they become prisoners of the faction shooting at them... or they will be recovered and returned to the US, if they are rescued by friendlies... Because they would not be staying in Iraq (and instead invited to fly missions), immunity would not be required in the same fashion, as they are not "based" in Iraq, requiring an agreement as to jurisdiction.... 

 

Maybe there is a new SOFA, though I'm not sure being invited to assist in quelling the masses, and our response so far would be one of air support... I'm not sure a status agreement would be necessary?? As we are not returning with ground troops based in country.... 

 

I've seen SOFA mentioned in here a few times relative to this most recent event...and am really interested in learning about something newly drafted (and why cause that would be a major big deal)... or learning how the old one can be extended now to US military, when that was not possible then... Interesting question.... I'll be interested in hearing more.... hummmm.....  .  

Edited June 19, 2014 by Rayzur

[DinarThug]

This Just In From Fox ... Cue The Music ... Maliki's An 'Ahh-Soul Man' ...

 

 

    

Iraq cannot survive with Maliki in charge


By Bartle Bull
Published June 18, 2014
FoxNews.com




Iraq’s prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, must go.

He has made himself so intolerable among the country’s minorities – Sunnis especially, but Kurds and others, too – that the debates currently devoted to the country are superfluous without his departure. No amount of American special forces, drones or collaboration with Tehran is the right amount to save Iraq if he stays.




Sullen, simple, paranoid, inflexible and incompetent, the Maliki of 2014 is incapable of either management or delegation, of either leadership or consensus. His best quality, a stubborn toughness that was an asset during his first term (2006-2010), now cannot even deliver a modicum of security.

Maliki, refusing to appoint either a defense or an interior minister since the formation of his second government in 2010, has effectively held both portfolios ever since. His Iraq ranks No. 171 out of 177 nations in a world corruption index. It possesses possibly the largest oil wealth on the planet, but independent oil companies such as Exxon, Occidental Petroleum, and Statoil are either pulling out or selling down.

Most importantly, after eight years of increasingly sectarian rule despite a parliamentary coalition system that twice put him in power with a broad electoral base (and heavy U.S. backing), the arch-Shia chauvinist Maliki is hopelessly, terminally divisive.

Iraq has one piece of luck going its way these days. The current ISIS spectacular, bogging down already, happens to come at a critical time in Iraq’s constitutional calendar. On April 30, Iraq conducted its fourth national parliamentary election since January, 2005. The turnout was once again over 60 percent. International observers judged it free and fair, as they always have in post-Saddam Iraq.

Iraq’s Supreme Court certified the election results on Tuesday, and Maliki’s premiership has officially been in interim “caretaker” status since. The Land of the Purple Finger’s political system now settles down to choosing its next government.

It is this contest that really matters now. Washington must allow Iraq’s impressive electoral process to run its course and dump this disastrous government, as it surely will without American intercession on Maliki’s behalf.

After eight years of Maliki’s premiership, the recent election was more than anything a referendum on him. Seventy percent of the country, including 40 percent of his fellow Shias, voted No. Meanwhile, Iran does not love him: He is not particularly biddable, spent most of his exile in Syria and has bought almost all of Iraq’s weapons from the U.S. Today, barring an about-turn in the White House, the Obama administration is his only friend.

The current violence is not entirely Maliki’s fault. It is Iraq’s cruel destiny to sit geographically on the very fault line of a faith in which many Sunnis and Shias see each other as apostates – a sin punishable, for the strict, by death.

But Iraq can survive that. It is fashionable to call it an artificial country. In fact, Mesopotamia – the ancient Greek word for it – is the oldest geographical-political construct on earth. Its name, used immemorially in one way or another by local peoples, comes from Uruk, the city where writing was invented 4,000 years ago.

Under the Baghdad Caliphate that ruled much of the Muslim world from 750 to 1258, outbursts of bloody intra-Muslim sectarian violence did not break up the Mesopotamian core of the empire.

Under the Ottoman Empire, Iraq’s last polity before the current borders, the three provinces of Basra, Baghdad, and Mosul – corresponding to today’s Shia south, Sunni center and west and Kurdish north – were administered as a unit loosely answerable to Baghdad for centuries. Sunni-Shia violence and bids for independence in the Kurdish highlands were frequent, but they meant little.

More recently, Iraq survived the Sunni apartheid and quasi-genocides of Saddam Hussein. It survived the horrendous four-year bloodletting that followed the American-led invasion in 2003.

It is a tough place, probably the world’s toughest.

What Iraq cannot survive is a premier who can neither hold the country together by strength nor provide the tolerance and inclusivity to make the loose rule of Baghdad, as envisioned by the country’s popular federalist constitution, acceptable to the large minorities.



Bartle Bull is an author and journalist who has written about Iraq for the Wall Street Journal, Financial Times, Washington Post, New York Times and many other publications. His next book is a history of Iraq. He manages a fund that invests in the country.

 

         

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/06/18/iraq-cannot-survive-with-maliki-in-charge/

[Rayzur]

This Just In From Fox ... Cue The Music ... Maliki's An 'Ahh-Soul Man' ...

 

 

    

 

 

Music Cued as Requested...

 

[dinar_millions]

He was waiting on the troops immunity before going in and kicking a$$. They have it now. Immunity is part of the SOFA agreement isn't it?

Yes and we may get to keep peacekeepers there ALA Korea after the uprising is crushed..

[Rayzur]

Yes and we may get to keep peacekeepers there ALA Korea after the uprising is crushed..

 

Cool, you got the 411.... what SOFA is this referencing?? The old one, or did we sign something new? I called a buddy and he was wtf? So I'm glad you know about this. Is there a new one??? I told him I'd let him know, so will be eyes glued for the info... and thx

 

After thought.. are you talking about the Strategic Framework Agreement?? which is not SOFA... so we might be talking about 2 different things??? Maybe?

Edited June 19, 2014 by Rayzur

[jobug38]

Rayzur, right before I came to post on this article I read another post on the forum under Iraqi news stating that Iraq has signed an agreement with US for immunity for the soldiers. It didn't make any since to me about this matter back in 2010 either.

[DinarThug]

CNN . Broadcasting With Immunity Under Advice From An Attorney !

Sources: The Iraqi government has agreed to grant U.S. troops immunity required

- JUNE 18, 2014

BAGHDAD - East June 18: diplomatic sources in Baghdad said the U.S. contacts with the Iraqi government focused on the granting of U.S. soldiers being recruited immunity Aleghanonahoukalt sources that the Iraqi government has agreed in principle to give them immunities required though she had refused when organizing Convention on the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq in two thousand and one Ashrwachart sources which expressed reservations on the condition of anonymity that the approval of the Iraqi government will facilitate increasing the number of Marines sent to Iraq to four thousand spread half of them in Baghdad and the other half in the other areas of conflict.

http://www.alsharqiya.com/?p=127747

Rayzur, right before I came to post on this article I read another post on the forum under Iraqi news stating that Iraq has signed an agreement with US for immunity for the soldiers.

Ya My Boy SandFly Buried It Back Onto The 2nd Page ! (See Above)

[aaanth]

you mean a "sole" man don't you?  lol

[skeetdog]

Thanks DT....I don't think there's a new SOFA ...there was something posted earlier about Iraq giving US Soldiers immunity...

Damn I need to learn to type quicker or reads slower...Yall're all over dis....

[Rayzur]

Ahhhh thanks Thug and JoBug.. that makes total sense..... this is not SOFA, which, as mentioned in your article post above Iraq was not into granting immunity after the draw down subsequent to the expiration of the SOFA agreement with Iraq... and without some kind of immunity protection, the US is not real likely to play now, just as we didn't then.. So I'm really glad the US is (apparently) continuing to take a hard line on this one.....and it dawned on Iraq that this is as much an issue now as it was then.... 

Makes total sense now, using the word SOFA threw me and I was like omg what did I miss... ... thanks guys.... gotta love you informed ones of DV   Appreciate it...

 

 

Now I gotta go shore up my counter insurgence for "thanks"  (good one Thug)

 

 

btw word is the buzz of the boys and girls in the official tank is... that this will likely be a very protracted into years thing if we don't do something,..... and now the something is what's up for consideration... Also, no telling how the tank will translate into action if any... and as always, they could be wrong...

And further, to my surprise, there is some leaning toward support of a division into three... as after all our major push for one was to offset the impact of Iran... and that didn't work out so well... .

Edited June 19, 2014 by Rayzur

[amberamin]

Thursday, June 19th, 2014 08:57 Increasing U.S. calls to step aside in favor Maliki

• Font size  
• Print
• Email

 

 

Baghdad / follow Baghdadi News /

Shows President Barack Obama to pressure from U.S. lawmakers, on Wednesday, to persuade Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to step down because of what they see as a failure of leadership in the face of a rebellion displays his country at risk.

She said the agency (Reuters), saying: While Obama held a meeting with Congressional leaders to discuss U.S. options in Iraq, joined by senior officials in the U.S. government to a group of owners and critics blamed for error in the treatment of sectarian divisions exploited by the militants militants. "

 

Gen. Martin Dempsey, Chief of Staff of the U.S. Congress in session in the Maliki government asked the U.S. air force to help in addressing the Sunni insurgents who overran the north of the country.

He did not say you will meet Gen. Washington and the Iraqi request or not, but Dempsey pointed out that the U.S. military is not in a hurry to launch air strikes in Iraq, pointing to the need to clarify the volatile situation on the ground so they can choose any targets "rational." It seems that Obama agrees to a large extent with the army in this opinion.

Obama briefed congressional leaders on Wednesday on the situation in Iraq and accept them as it considers options "to increase security assistance" to a country that is struggling fighters of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant.

The White House said in a statement after the meeting in the Oval Office and lasted more than an hour, "Chairman presented a report on the U.S. government efforts to counter the threat of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria by urging Iraq's leaders to set aside sectarian agendas that unite a sense of national unity."

A senior official in the U.S. government later that Obama did not decide at the meeting a particular course of action and that it has not yet made a final decision.

A source at the U.S. National Security The Obama administration has quietly started to consult with Congress on a plan to redirect some of the funding for the current intelligence to help fund U.S. operations in Iraq.

The United States, which withdrew its troops from Iraq in 2011 that Baghdad must take steps toward sectarian reconciliation before deciding Obama any military action against the insurgency led by the organization of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, an offshoot of the al-Qaida network.

Maliki did not seem so far little willingness to form a government more accommodating each spectra.

Said Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein ‭ ‭ ‭ ‭ ‭ ‭ ‬ ‬ ‬ ‬ ‬ ‬ head of the Intelligence Committee in the Senate, "Frankly .. Maliki government should go if it wants any reconciliation."

He called on Republican Sen. John McCain, speaking in the Senate to the use of air power in Iraq, but also urged Obama to "make it clear to the owners that ended his time."

Obama did not ask the government publicly departure of al-Maliki, but showed signs of discontent with him.

The Minister of Defense Chuck Hagel in a congressional hearing, "this current government in Iraq has not done at all commitments made to form a government of national unity with Sunnis and Kurds and Shiites."

Said White House spokesman Jay Carney said al-Maliki did not do enough "to govern in a way that is inclusive and not exclusion, and that he contributed to the creation of the situation and the crisis that we are witnessing today in Iraq."

Carney did not reach to the extent of calling the departure of al-Maliki. Carney was asked to step down Should al-Maliki said: "It is clear that this is not us that we decide."

Earlier, White House officials said that Obama has not yet made a decision on what action should be taken, but the president has ruled out the possibility of re-forces to carry out combat role there. And opposed by some in the anti-war camp in the Democratic Party for Obama any military action may drag the United States back into conflict.

Sen. Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader of the Senate after meeting with Obama that the organization of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant "poses a real threat" to U.S. interests. He was quoted as saying in a statement: "Unfortunately, the Iraqi security forces are far less capable than it was when the President to withdraw all our troops (at the end of 2011)."

The focus of much of the attention on the possibility of the implementation of the air strikes, whether military aircraft or drone, but U.S. officials said they are worried about the possibility of injuring the wrong targets and causing casualties of civilians.

The options under consideration include the intensification of training Iraqi forces might use ALL U.S. special forces and expedite the delivery of weapons and increase intelligence-sharing activities.

According to statements by U.S. officials recently that any U.S. military role would be directed to the selective and that if the government decided to proceed with the Obama strikes, they may be limited attacks unmanned aircraft such as those used in Pakistan and Yemen. Finished / Agencies

http://translate.google.com.pk/translate?hl=en&sl=ar&u=http://www.albaghdadianews.com/&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dal%2Bbaghdadia%2Bnews%26espv%3D210%26es_sm%3D93%26biw%3D1024%26bih%3D676

[Kinematik]

No sh*t sherlock !

[sandfly]

THANKS

[nannab]

Thank you Amberamin.

[yota691]

U.S. moves and pressure on Obama to remove al-Maliki from office after "failing" leadership

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 19, 2014 08:24 J P

Twilight News / exposed President Barack Obama to pressure from U.S. lawmakers to convince Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to step down because of what they see as a failure of leadership in the face of a rebellion displays his country at risk.

While Obama held a meeting with congressional leaders to discuss U.S. options in Iraq, joined by senior officials in the U.S. government to a group of owners and critics blamed for error in the treatment of sectarian divisions exploited by the militants militants.

Gen. Martin Dempsey, Chief of Staff of the U.S. Congress in session in the Maliki government, which asked the U.S. air force to assist them in addressing the gunmen who invaded the north of the country.

He did not say you will meet Gen. Washington and the Iraqi request or not, but Dempsey pointed out that the U.S. military is not in a hurry to launch air strikes in Iraq, pointing to the need to clarify the volatile situation on the ground so they can choose any targets "rational." It seems that Obama agrees to a large extent with the army in this opinion.

Obama briefed congressional leaders on Wednesday on the situation in Iraq and accept them as it considers options "to increase security assistance" to a country that is struggling fighters of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant.

The White House said in a statement after the meeting in the Oval Office and lasted more than an hour, "Chairman presented a report on the U.S. government efforts to counter the threat of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria by urging Iraq's leaders to set aside sectarian agendas that unite a sense of national unity."

A source at the U.S. National Security The Obama administration has quietly started to consult with Congress on a plan to redirect some of the funding for the current intelligence to help fund U.S. operations in Iraq.

The United States, which withdrew its troops from Iraq in 2011 that Baghdad must take steps toward sectarian reconciliation before deciding Obama any military action against the insurgency led by the organization of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, an offshoot of the al-Qaida network.

Maliki did not seem so far little willingness to form a government more accommodating each spectra, "but on the contrary was the motto before and after the elections is a majority government" .

Said Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein, head of the Intelligence Committee in the Senate, "Frankly .. Maliki government should go if you want any reconciliation."

He called on Republican Sen. John McCain, speaking in the Senate to the use of air power in Iraq, but also urged Obama to "make it clear to the owners that ended his time."

Obama did not ask the government publicly departure of al-Maliki, but showed signs of discontent with him.

The Minister of Defense Chuck Hagel in the Congressional hearing, "this current government in Iraq has not done at all commitments made to form a government of national unity with Sunnis and Kurds and Shiites."

Said White House spokesman Jay Carney said al-Maliki did not do enough "to govern in a way that is inclusive and not exclusion, and that he contributed to the creation of the situation and the crisis that we are witnessing today in Iraq."

Carney did not reach to the extent of calling the departure of al-Maliki. Carney was asked to step down Should al-Maliki said: "It is clear that this is not us that we decide."

Earlier, White House officials said that Obama has not yet made a decision on what action should be taken, but the president has ruled out the possibility of re-forces to carry out combat role there.

And opposed by some in the anti-war camp in the Democratic Party for Obama any military action may drag the United States back into conflict.

Sen. Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader of the Senate after meeting with Obama that the organization of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant "poses a real threat" to U.S. interests.

He was quoted as saying in a statement: "Unfortunately, the Iraqi security forces are far less capable than it was when the President to withdraw all our troops (at the end of 2011)."

The focus of much of the attention on the possibility of implementing theWhether air strikes by warplanes or drone, but U.S. officialsSaid they are worried about the possibility of injuring the wrong targets and causing casualtiesCivilians .

The Independent: Washington requires stepping down al-Maliki to intervene militarily

 

 

 

London newspaper "The Independent" British to "step down and Washington require Maliki to intervene militarily" against Daash. " The Guardian has learned that "Washington senior Iraqi officials reported that Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to step down if it had to intervene militarily to stop the advance of the extremists." The newspaper said "Today, al-Maliki is seen as under the influence of Iran and the Iraqi parliament to choose him as president and then as president to choose someone from the largest party to form a government. Unlikely choice of Maliki under the union against the other parties and administrative procedures may be slow. " The paper, "The success or failure of the United States and local opponents Maliki replaced in the coming weeks will be pivotal in determining the fate of the conflict. You might think "Daash" to spend his advantage by attacking Baghdad quickly before they take Washington and Tehran's their decision. "

[ronscarpa]

 

In Washington, growing chorus calls for Iraq's Maliki to go

BY PATRICIA ZENGERLE AND MATT SPETALNICK

WASHINGTON Thu Jun 19, 2014 @ 6:46am IST

 

•  
• Link this
• Share this
•  
• Email
• Pri

 

(Reuters) - President Barack Obama came under pressure from U.S. lawmakers on Wednesday to persuade Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to step down over what they see as failed leadership in the face of an insurgency threatening his country.

As Obama held an hour-long meeting with congressional leaders on U.S. options in Iraq, administration officials joined a chorus of criticism of Maliki, faulting him for failing to heal sectarian rifts that militants have exploited.

Army General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the U.S. military's Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a congressional hearing that Maliki's Shi'ite-led government had asked for U.S. air power to help counter Sunni militants who have overrun northern Iraq.

The general did not say whether Washington would meet the request. But Dempsey signaled that the U.S. military - apparently much like Obama - was in no rush to launch airstrikes in Iraq, citing the need to clarify a chaotic situation on the ground so any targets could be selected "responsibly."

In Oval Office talks, Obama briefed the lawmakers on efforts to get Iraqi leaders to "set aside sectarian agendas," reviewed options for "increased security assistance" and sought their views, the White House said.

A senior administration official said afterward that Obama did not lay out a course of action at the meeting and had yet to make a final decision.

At the same time, the Obama administration has quietly started consulting Congress about a plan for redirecting some current intelligence funding to help finance expanded U.S. operations in Iraq, a U.S. national security source said.

The United States, which invaded Iraq in 2003 to topple President Saddam Hussein and withdrew its troops in 2011, has said Iraq's government must take steps toward sectarian reconciliation before Obama will decide on any military action against the insurgency led by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, or ISIL, an al Qaeda splinter group.

Maliki has so far shown little willingness to create a more inclusive administration.

"The Maliki government, candidly, has got to go if you want any reconciliation," said U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democratic chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

 

'HIS TIME IS UP'

Republican Senator John McCain, speaking in the Senate, called for the use of American air power, but also urged Obama to "make it make very clear to Maliki that his time is up."

The Obama administration has not openly sought Maliki's departure, but has shown signs of frustration with him.

"This current government in Iraq has never fulfilled the commitments it made to bring a unity government together with the Sunnis, the Kurds and the Shia," Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel told the congressional hearing.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said Maliki had not done enough "to govern inclusively and that has contributed to the situation and the crisis that we have today in Iraq."

He stopped short of calling for Maliki - in power for eight years and the effective winner of a parliamentary election two months ago - to resign. Asked if Maliki should step down, Carney told reporters: "That's not, obviously, for us to decide."

Although Obama is continuing to deliberate on what action to take, the president - who won the 2008 election on a platform calling for an orderly withdrawal from the unpopular war in Iraq - has ruled out sending troops back into combat there. Some in the anti-war camp of Obama's Democratic Party oppose any military action that could drag the United States back into the conflict, and he is apparently wary of such a risk.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell said after the meeting with Obama that ISIL's operations in Iraq and Syria "represent a grave threat" to U.S. interests. "Unfortunately, Iraqi security forces are now less capable than when the president withdrew the entirety of our force (at the end of 2011)," McConnell said in a statement.

Much attention has been focused on the possible use of airstrikes, either by planes or unmanned drones, but U.S. officials have made clear they are concerned about the risk of hitting the wrong targets and causing civilian casualties.

Options under consideration include stepped-up training of Iraqi forces, possibly with U.S. special forces, accelerated delivery of weapons and increased sharing of intelligence.

U.S. officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Iraq's request for air support included drone strikes and increased surveillance by U.S. drones, which have been flying over Iraq for some time.

Recent assertions by U.S. officials that any U.S. military role would be targeted and selective suggest that if Obama gives the go-ahead for strikes, it might involve limited attacks with unmanned drones like those used in Pakistan and Yemen.

 

(Additional reporting by David Alexander, Mark Hosenball, Susan Cornwell, Phil Stewart, Emily Stephenson, Roberta Rampton, Jeff Mason, Mark Felsenthal; Writing by Matt Spetalnick; Editing by G Crosse, Will Dunham and Peter Cooney)

http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/06/19/us-iraq-security-usa-idINKBN0EU04P20140619

 

CLINTON CALLS FOR MALIKI TO STEP DOWN

VIDEO LINK

Tuesday on Fox News Channel's "Special Report," Greta Van Susteren asked former Secretary of State Hillarious Clinton what can be done to stop the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) an al Qaeda splinter group controlling a large portion of Iraq, from advancing towards Baghdad where Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's government is based. 

“If I were Iraqi, I would be thinking hard about -- do I want Maliki to continue to be prime minister?” Clinton said. “He has failed as leader, purged the military, rearranged the government, gone after Sunnis. That is a recipe for continuing instability.” 

CNN
Iraq crisis: Is it time for al-Maliki to step down?

CNN VIDEO 

(CNN) – The U.S. handed him the keys to Iraq when it pulled out combat troops in 2011, and asked him not to scratch it. 

But Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has since lost control of a wide swath of his country. 
And now some, like the chairwoman of the Senate intelligence committee Dianne Feinstein, are wondering aloud whether it's time for him to hit the bricks. 

"It seems to me that Maliki has to be convinced that it is in the greater interest of his country to retire and for this newly elected government to put together a new government," said Feinstein. 

The Woodrow Wilson Center's Robin Wright and Dartmouth's Daniel Benjamin, former the principal adviser to Secretary of State Hillarious Clinton on counterterrorism, discuss.

Edited June 19, 2014 by ronscarpa

[easyrider]

if Washington says he has to go then he has to GO!! they PUT him in power!!! and they WILL take him out of power.