Will/should Iraq accept the proposed long-term security pact with the U.S.?

Many are balking.

Meanwhile, in related news, new “mentor” contracts are being negotiated with Iraqi ministries.

I thought I was familiar with just about every modern iteration of doublespeak, but I’ve never before heard prisons referred to as “reconciliation centers.”

I don’t know if they will; quite likely depending on how hard we lean on them. They shouldn’t, because we are their enemies.

At this point, what’ve we got to lean with?!

The threat of leaving. While the general Iraqi public has every reason to hate us and want us gone, the collaborationist “government” knows that when we leave they will have to flee the country or die. And the “Iraq” that will or won’t choose to accept anything we demand is that “government”; not the Iraqi people.

Update:

Guess the “threat of leaving” ain’t gonna have much weight.

I think you’re considerably misstating the situation in Iraq. Hakim’s Shi’ite faction (the former SCIRI) is part of the government, and that’s not chicken feed - that’s the other main Shi’ite faction, besides the Sadrists. Maliki, who IIRC is allied with Hakim’s faction but not part of it, might be out on a limb if we leave, but the government as a whole is not without popular support.

Their positions in government might evaporate if we leave, because one way or another, the Sadrists and Sunnis are going to demand a share of power. But I don’t see any reason to expect that their lives would be forfeit, even though most Iraqis want us to get our asses out of their country.

However, it seems pretty obvious that our presence in country, especially our role in propping up the government and shielding it from the other factions (including helping them launch military strikes on their domestic rivals), strengthens the government’s reluctance to negotiate with the other factions and share power with them.

This could be our ticket out. If the Bushiviks can spin this as “victory”, our troops may be headed home pretty soon.

How about “The Iraqi people have the confidence and the will to take control of their own security. This is, and always has been, the Ultimate Goal (Vers. 6.7, revised). Clearly, the visionary policies of The Leader have born fruitbats…”

No ticket out under Bush. This is about what happens 5-10 years out, not what happens between now and Jan.

A very good preliminary analysis is available here…

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_06/013855.php

from the website of the Washington Monthly

There is considerable murk in the mix, for one thing, we seem to be subject to conflicting “leaks”. A lot depends on your opinion of the Independent and the liklihood that they have definitive sources. Your correspondent from the conservative wing of the extreme left offers no opinion, it is, in the words of famous paranoid J.J. Angleton “a wilderness of mirrors”.

Oh, and WaMo is somewhat tepidly leftish, so tighty rightys are advised to proceed with Shields Up, though half strength should be sufficient.

Now the London Independent is reporting a “secret deal” in the works:

Not clear, though, if this is anything more than what was covered in the OP.

Because they are collaborators. If they stay in Iraq, they will have literally millions of mortal enemies, and no more American military to protect them. People have been murdered for working with Americans even with our army there.

And this just in…

If it wasn’t the Bushiviks, I would never believe it…

(The link seems to insist on printing, but the story is too wierd not to be linked, you guys would think I was making shit up…)

More details leaking out:

The chutzpah . . . it burns . . .

And now it appears that the above set of demands has come down from what they wanted to start with!

It’s pretty obvious that despite our blathering about “democracy” and “sovereignty”, this was a war of conquest, and we look at Iraq as a conquered country that should just submit to our every whim and abuse. We simply aren’t willing to admit it, or we’d just out-and-out say “obey or die”.

So, no, Iraq shouldn’t accept a “security pact” or any other arrangement with us they can avoid. We are their enemy, not their friend, and a dishonest, self deluding one at that.

No genuine government could agree to these terms, which are a surrender of sovereignty to an occupying power. If they agree then they prove themselves to be traitors and quislings.

The talks are now dead. No hint they’ll be revived during the current Administration.

Which raises the question of what will be the legal position of our forces in Iraq after the UN mandate expires at the end of this year.