Bremer: U.S. Could Quit Iraq Next Summer

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/iraq/complete/la-073103iraq_lat,1,1039651.story?coll=la-home-headlines

The American administrator of Iraq, L. Paul Bremer III, said today that the United States could relinquish control of the country by next summer, an accelerated timetable that would suit politicians both in the United States and Iraq.

--snip--

"How long will this take? It is in the hands of the Iraqi people. But it's not unrealistic to think we would have elections by midyear 2004 and when that government is installed ... my job here will be over," said Bremer, who was guarded by a combination of uniformed military, special forces and secret service.

An Iraqi politician close to the country's new governing council said that the approaching U.S. elections in the fall of 2004 may be one factor motivating Washington to seek an earlier exit from Iraq.

"The key issue is that the Bush administration would like to produce some results for the American public," said the high-ranking staff member for the council. "They didn't find any weapons of mass destruction and if there's no elected government, no elections, no real democracy by the time of the 2004 elections, it would be a big, big debacle."

"shoot...so we are losing votes on the prospect that we will be in Iraq as an occupier anywhere from 4 years till armageddon, huh? No problem...we just tell everyone we are planning to leave by the middle of 2004. And when we get to June 2004, we tell them it's just a matter of a few more months and what a great success we are...but we are just not quite done..... And after we steal the election.....who the hell cares!"

Master Rove doesn't want Duhbya to run for election while the troops are bogged down in the Iraqi quagmire, so we're out of there before the election, no matter what.

Set up the puppet government, say the magic whoop-de-doo words, and then out.

That means they've given up on Iraq, they're not even going to try to rebuild it.

if Iraq descends into civi war and a new Saddam-like leader emerges. I mean, if you really think removing Saddam (and rebuilding the country) is the right thing to do, shouldn't you be willing to assume some of the risk that goes along with that? Some of us here at DU knew the whole invasion was done to assure Bush's election in 2004, and this just proves this entire enterprise is about politics and has nothing to do with "liberating" the Iraqis.

not as profitable as his puppetmasters thought.

Here is why, Briton did not back out of the international treties like th U.S. The British still hold things like the Geneva convention with some regard. The British have not tried to make the U.N. a trivial thing. Once again I will say I would not doubt the U.S. trying to leave Iraq, but I don't think the British will leave their responsiblities.

Because they rejected a United Nations-supervised administration of post-Hussein Iraq, the US and Britain needlessly shoulder most of the legal responsibility for the success or failure of the administration and reconstruction of Iraq. No wonder other nations and groupings, such as India, Pakistan and Nato, have rejected Washington's appeal for troops. Why risk the liabilities of a military occupation under current conditions, especially when a simple Security Council mandate could trump occupation law, with all its attendant burdens?
In an awkwardly crafted resolution in May, authored by Washington and London, the Security Council designated the two victorious nations as the "occupying powers". This title carries all the responsibilities, constraints and liabilities that arise under occupation law, codified in the fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 and other instruments. The UN assumed an advisory role but left the legal responsibility squarely with the US and Britain and reminded other nations of their obligations if they deployed troops in Iraq.
In the last half-century no country requiring such radical transformation has been placed under military occupation law instead of a UN mandate or trusteeship. No conquering military power has volunteered formally to embrace occupation law so boldly and with such enormous risk. And never in recent times has an occupation occurred that was so predictable for so long and yet so poorly planned for.
Occupation law was never intended to encourage invasion and occupation for the purpose of transforming a society, however noble that aim. The narrow purpose is to constrain an occupying military power and thus discourage aggression and permanent occupation. The humanitarian needs of the civilian population take priority and usually require the occupying power to act decisively for that purpose.

Rumsfeld was asked 2 weeks ago on the sunday talk shows about international help and he said it was coming. The senate voted 97-0 to get international help. Nobody will help because the U.S. is imposing to many restrictions on what they can and can not do. I am thinking that Japan has been blackmailed by the N. Korea thing somehow. Why would the PM of Japan go against the constitution otherwise to help in Iraq?

we'd be there for years. Sounds like the WH is worried.

Yep. That's why this is a very, very important pronouncement.

...every time he talks. Try setting a date Bremer.

Don

"Secret plan to end the war." Yeah, like I've been saying, Iraq is Vietnam in fast motion.

You are correct. That is what is going on, its mind boggling to see the CHIMP's handlers getting all edgy at his drop in public opinion polls.

Edited for spelling. its getting late

But I guess nobody cares.

None of this implies complete troop withdrawal. Pretending to grant the Iraqis their self-determination (isn't PNAC so generous?) would make a nice frame for 2004 but there's no way in hell they're going to permanently end the military relationship. Troop scaleback is certainly in the cards but expect permanent occupation bases to be kept in place to threaten Iran, Syria, Jordan and Saudi Arabia.

but we won't be delivering mail and picking up the trash anymore. That'll be for the really free, really elected Iraqi Council of Puppets to worry about.

"No electricity? No medicine? No water? Not our problem anymore, buster. We're done with that liberatin shit."

of supposed "freedom" for Iraqis, and the rest of the b.s. that
has become so transparent to the rest of the World. Shameful.

The oil belongs 100% to the Iraqi people--nothing less.

The whole point of the PNAC plan was to use Iraq as a staging base for operations in the Middle East. If we leave next summer, there is no way that that is enough time for us to have bases there.

This is an admission that the PNAC cabal is seeing a choice. Either they can stay in Iraq and try to pacify the country for a perpetual U.S. presence and lose the 2004 election, or they can get out at the last possible moment and have a shot at maintaining power.

Incidentally, no matter how bad the situation we leave behind in Iraq, does anyone doubt that Chimpy will take full advantage of the whole "Johnny comes marching home" bit?

shared plans that since recon could cost $100B...that they will sell securities based on the oil in the ground .... that will be pumped for a long time...and then it runs out...so much for "democracy".

deserves a :kick:.

their new military bases or their precious oil fields. We are just going to abandon the people of Iraq and only worry about protecting our 'interests'. This is what is going on in Afghanistan. This is the Bu$hCo way. Dump the existing government that's in your way. Establish new strategically located bases, protect the oil and the pipelines and let the rest of the country go to hell. Remember Bu$h said he wasn't into nation building.

Technically, both statements are accurate.

He's handing out promises the Bushies have no intention of keeping (just ask the 3rd ID), and it will do nothing to stop the Iraqis' attempts to get the US out of Iraq. The attacks on our troops are certain to continue, sad to say.

The Bush Junta really is going to "turn over" Iraq to the Iraqis before the election, no matter what, so Smirky McDipshit can claim victory.

Iraq is in the news every day because Americans are getting maimed and killed there on a daily basis. Do you think anyone is going to know what's going on in Iraq after the troops pull back? Does anyone know what's going on in Afghanistan? (Answer: no.) Same with Iraq.

If Bremer wanted to save our troops, he would begin Iraqi elections tomorrow. Can't have that...the Bushies would lose control of their prized oil. Democracy is the last thing the Bushies want in Iraq. W/the Iraqi powergrab going on now, it will take Bremer et al time to come up with another Saddam to lead the country, only a more cooperative one this time.

Consequently, our troops are in a doomed situation, and Bremer's "promise" is nothing more than whipped air.

What about the building of the air bases in Iraq, are they still going to do that? Does Bremmer mean elections in Iraq, but U.S. military still in there running the show? If they pull out with no military in there the whole country will fall into anarchy and Hussein if still alive will rise again like the Phoenix. The U.S. will still be in there in an "advisory" role. They will still have troops over there for years to come. I think this administration is given up on the WMD issue, that is why they have been trying to sell the "WMD program" thing. They have been trying to sell the recession as caused by Clinton, they have been trying to sell the need to have the USA PAtriot act II put in place, they have been trying to sell the states red ink as the fault of no fiscal discipline by the states, they are trying to sell the recovery of the economy by citing the drop in unemployment, they have been saying that the recovery is not as sharp or big, because the recession was not that big. They have been trying to sell his popularity polls and electability polls, they have been getting the idea out there that Sen. Edwards is late paying his taxes, are starting the mud slinging already. They have bitched that the add by the DNC on the SOTU was a lie, they have been busier than a cat in the litter box coverig up this shit.

2042, that is. Right after we stole the last drop of oil from Iraq??????

oops.

but one should never underestimate the greed of the evil...

Who else is old enough to remember that crap? You can bet they want out by the election.