White House visits today by Mideast leaders, as well as former Vice President Al Gore, are overshadowing an agreement between the U.S. and Iraqi governments.
President Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki signed a document this morning agreeing to continue their countries' relationship under the United Nations for another year, with the goal of beginning direct bilateral negotiations on security and other matters next year.
"This moves us closer to normalized, bilateral relations between our two countries," the White House document states.
Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute, the president's war czar, briefed reporters on the agreement this morning, saying that the "basic message" is that "Iraq is increasingly able to stand on its own ... but it won't have to stand alone."
— Jon Ward, White House correspondent, The Washington Times
Comments (2)
The issue here is the word "normalized". Nothing normal sells in today's cherry-picking mainstream media. Unless blame is spun into it, it cannot be exploited by the David Gregorys of today's generation.
Posted by Larry Stone | November 27, 2007 7:40 AM
The war in Korea ended in 1953 and the United States still has approximately 30,000 troops in South Korea. These troops have stayed in Korea regardless of who was president, either a Republican or a Democrat. We still have American troops in Japan and Germany, over 60 years after then end of World War II. NATO troops are still in tiny Kosovo, almost ten years since they were first sent there. I think all of the Presidential candidates (both Republican or Democrat) should be honest with the American people and tell them that we are going to have a military presence in Iraq for a long, long, time. The United States, and the world, need to understand that there are certain countries where sectarian violence can only be stopped if military troops are there to physically separate the warring parties. If we do not want to make this commitment, then we should leave. But a continued American presence in both Iraq and Afghanistan could be the only thing keeping those countries from disintegrating and causing even more chaos in an already troubled region of the world. It certainly is going to be a large investment in time, effort, money, troops, and lives, but it also may be the only option we have for stabilizing the Middle East.
Posted by Libertyship46 | November 27, 2007 3:02 PM