
![]() |
|
|

| [-] |

| [−] |
| [−] |
| [−] |
| [−] |
Prev | List | Random | Next |

The White House has responded to press accounts of the alleged dispute between Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki and U.S. Ambassador Khalilzad and General Casey. (Yes, I'm convinced they read Mudville in the White House.)
Of note is this quote - sourced to the BBC:
In Yesterday's Press Conference, Prime Minister Maliki Was Asked Whether The United States Had Set A "Timetable For The Withdrawal Of Foreign Forces From Iraq Within 18 Months."As I suspected - a question phrased to mischaracterize the original statement from Khalilzad.
That also explains this quote from Maliki in yesterday's report:
The prime minister dismissed U.S. talk of timelines as driven by the coming midterm elections in the United States. "I am positive that this is not the official policy of the American government but rather a result of the ongoing election campaign. And that does not concern us much," he said.Read that as his acknowledgement that the actual question was being phrased by a reporter, and not the U.S. government (i.e. Khalilzad) and it all fits together - Maliki knows it's the press statements that are driven by the elections, and which "does not concern us much". The actions of the U.S. government obviously concern him very deeply - no one could believe otherwise.
But enough of yesterday's news - on to Maliki's bombshell for today - in which he declares that he can get the job done sooner than the most optimistic U.S. timeline anyway:
Iraq's prime minister said on Thursday he could get violence under control in six months, half the time U.S. generals say they need, provided Washington gave him more weaponry and more say over his own forces.That kind of leadership is exactly what is needed in Iraq - I say we give him what he wants, get out of the way as much as possible, and see what happens in six months.
<...>
"They think building Iraqi forces will need 12 to 18 months, for us to be in control of security," Maliki said, referring to remarks two days ago by U.S. commander General George Casey."We agree our forces need work but think that if, as we are asking, the rebuilding of our forces was in our own hands, then it would take not 12-18 months but six might be enough."
<...>
"I am now prime minister and overall commander of the armed forces yet I cannot move a single company without Coalition approval because of the U.N. mandate," Maliki said."I have to be careful fighting some militias and terrorists ... because they are better armed than the army and police," Maliki said. "The police are sharing rifles."
<...>
Asked what kind of Iraqi forces he wanted, Maliki said: "I'm not talking about modern tanks or modern warplanes and missiles ... I'm talking about having a well-trained army, swift and light on its feet and at the same time with medium weapons."
By the way, why wasn't this the biggest headline story of the day?