Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

United Nations extends U.S. forces in Iraq for year

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • United Nations extends U.S. forces in Iraq for year

    I have to admit, I'm at a loss for words. I'll just say, again, that the U.N. sucks.

    Dec 18, 10:22 PM EST


    UN extends US-led force in Iraq

    By JOHN HEILPRIN
    Associated Press Writer

    UNITED NATIONS (AP) -- The U.N. Security Council voted unanimously Tuesday to extend the U.S.-led multinational force in Iraq for one year, a move that Iraq's prime minister said would be his nation's "final request" for help.

    Authorization for the 160,000-strong multinational force was extended until the end of 2008 because "the threat in Iraq continues to constitute a threat to international peace and security," according to the resolution.

    Iraq's U.N. Ambassador Hamid Al Bayati called it a historic day for the country because the council renewed the mandate "for the last time" after long and hard negotiation. He expressed hope that the council would deal with Iraq without any military authorizations after 2008.

    "We realize that Iraq still needs more time and intensive efforts to enable our armed forces to take over the security responsibilities all over Iraq from the multinational forces," he said, noting that Iraqi forces took responsibility for Basra two days ago and now control nine provinces.

    U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad formally introduced the resolution Tuesday afternoon and soon after the council met to approve it.

    After the 15-0 vote, Khalilzad cited "positive developments in Iraq" including reduced violence. He welcomed the council's support for the Iraqi government's desire "to sustain this momentum" and keep the force in the country.

    The resolution requires a review of the mandate at the request of the Iraqi government or by June 15, 2008. It reiterates a provision of past resolutions that the council "will terminate this mandate earlier" if Iraq requests that.

    It also says the Security Council would have to consider Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's request, in a letter on Dec. 7 to the Security Council's president, that "this is to be the final request ... for the extension of the mandate" for the U.S.-led force.

    Asked whether the United States wanted to keep the door open to maintaining its troops in Iraq longer, Khalilzad said the extension is at the request of the Iraqi government "representing the will of the Iraqi people."

    "We hope that ... with progress in Iraqi security capabilities that Iraq's goal of self-reliance can be achieved as soon as possible," he said.

    In Baghdad, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari told reporters Tuesday that "there has been a great deal of progress" thanks to the joint efforts of Iraqis and the multinational force."

    "These gains are really very significant. We see them in the streets of Baghdad in many provinces. This needs to be pressed on," said Zebari, according to a transcript provided by the U.S. State Department in Washington.

    The Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress, reported Tuesday that international donors since 2003 have pledged about $16.4 billion to rebuild Iraq, according to figures current as of October.

    Two-thirds of that, however, was pledged in the form of loans, it said. The biggest loans were $3.4 billion from Japan; $3 billion from the World Bank; up to $2.55 billion from the International Monetary Fund; and $1 billion from Iran.

    A little over a year ago, the Security Council voted unanimously to extend the force's mandate through 2007.

    The Bush administration attributes an overall reduction in violence in Iraq in recent months to the escalation of U.S. forces that Bush ordered a year ago. The military claims attacks in Iraq are at their lowest levels since the first year of the American invasion in 2003, providing a chance for reconciliation among rival sects.
    Life is not measured by the number of breaths you take, but by the moments that take your breath away.
    "Hating America is something best left to Mobius. He is an expert Yank hater.
    He also hates Texans and Australians, he does diversify." ~ Braindead

  • #2
    The UN should resolve to be resolute.
    Long time member @ Apolyton
    Civilization player since the dawn of time

    Comment


    • #3
      Slowhand, I want our troops out as soon as possible but what did you want the U.N. to do, tell the U.S. to withdraw tommorow and allow the country to collapse into real civil war?

      Comment


      • #4
        Wait, wait before yall continue let Ambassador AAHZ take his seat... ok...

        let the fists fly...

        Order of the Fly

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Vesayen
          Slowhand, I want our troops out as soon as possible but what did you want the U.N. to do, tell the U.S. to withdraw tommorow and allow the country to collapse into real civil war?
          Like that won't happen? Like you won't be whining about us being there in, what, 2 days?
          Life is not measured by the number of breaths you take, but by the moments that take your breath away.
          "Hating America is something best left to Mobius. He is an expert Yank hater.
          He also hates Texans and Australians, he does diversify." ~ Braindead

          Comment


          • #6
            We broke it, we bought it.
            "I have as much authority as the pope. I just don't have as many people who believe it." — George Carlin

            Comment


            • #7
              We? The U.N.? Screw the U.N., the most worthless organization that exists. If it was a business, it would have been broke years ago. As a military entity, it has been broke.
              Life is not measured by the number of breaths you take, but by the moments that take your breath away.
              "Hating America is something best left to Mobius. He is an expert Yank hater.
              He also hates Texans and Australians, he does diversify." ~ Braindead

              Comment


              • #8
                It's so tragic, it could be called perverse humor. The U.N. screws over Bush Sr. AND Jr. AND Clinton.
                They're on quite a roll.
                Life is not measured by the number of breaths you take, but by the moments that take your breath away.
                "Hating America is something best left to Mobius. He is an expert Yank hater.
                He also hates Texans and Australians, he does diversify." ~ Braindead

                Comment


                • #9
                  Uh, Sloww?

                  The U.N. Security Council voted unanimously Tuesday
                  You do know that the US sits on the Security Council, right?

                  And you do know we have veto power over any UNSC action, right?

                  So you do understand that this means we voted in favor of the Security Council resolution, right? And that we could have stopped it if we wanted to, but we chose not to, right?

                  The US behaving responsibly
                  "I have as much authority as the pope. I just don't have as many people who believe it." — George Carlin

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Didn't we go into Iraq to enforce UN resolutions anyway? That was one of the BS excuses given, so naturally the UN should have a say....no?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Verto
                      Didn't we go into Iraq to enforce UN resolutions anyway? That was one of the BS excuses given, so naturally the UN should have a say....no?
                      Maybe yes, maybe no, but the point is that the Security Council can't do anything we don't approve of. So far from "screwing over" Bush, this is an action wholly sanctioned by Bush.

                      I'm sure Sloww will get back to us just as soon as he figures out whom he's actually mad at.
                      "I have as much authority as the pope. I just don't have as many people who believe it." — George Carlin

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly


                        Maybe yes, maybe no, but the point is that the Security Council can't do anything we don't approve of. So far from "screwing over" Bush, this is an action wholly sanctioned by Bush.

                        I'm sure Sloww will get back to us just as soon as he figures out whom he's actually mad at.
                        I just like pointing out the hypocrisy of all those who love to spout off that particular line to support the war...but in the same breath rail against the UN.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Oh, I'm with you, Verto. Preach, brother, preach!
                          "I have as much authority as the pope. I just don't have as many people who believe it." — George Carlin

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly
                            We broke it, we bought it.
                            This argument would work if US forces would have any influence in "fixing" Iraq from it's broken state. Or, if there'd even be any sort of definition for a "fix". If the criterion for "mission accomplished, let's withdraw" is get rid of Saddam, it has been done. If the criterion is hold free elections, it has been done. What is the criterion? Furthermore, how is US troop presence enabling this criterion?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by VJ

                              This argument would work if US forces would have any influence in "fixing" Iraq from it's broken state. Or, if there'd even be any sort of definition for a "fix". If the criterion for "mission accomplished, let's withdraw" is get rid of Saddam, it has been done. If the criterion is hold free elections, it has been done. What is the criterion? Furthermore, how is US troop presence enabling this criterion?
                              The Criteria -- Bush's, not mine -- is that (1) Iraq develops a stable, democratic government that can "stand on its own," and (2) the US strikes a blow against the global threat of terrorism. Given that Iraq's government is neither stable nor especially democratic nor capable of sustaining itself, and given that Iraq is now one big, open-air terrorism career fair (as a direct result of our invasion), it seems to me our work isn't nearly finished there.

                              Or, put more simply, the goal is to make post-invasion Iraq less of a threat to US security than pre-invasion Iraq. And we're not even close yet.
                              "I have as much authority as the pope. I just don't have as many people who believe it." — George Carlin

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X