PDA

View Full Version : US Military hands back fortified green zone back to Iraq


Aussie3rddayfan
12-31-2008, 06:38 PM
From http://theaustralian.com.au

CONTROL of Baghdad's fortified green zone, a symbol of the US-led occupation of Iraq, will pass to Iraqi hands today in one of many transfers of power taking place as the country regains its sovereignty almost six years after the invasion.

The keys to Saddam Hussein's Republican Palace, which served as the US Embassy, will also be given back to Iraq's increasingly assertive Government.

In addition, US commanders returned control of a swath of Iraqi airspace at midnight and British Forces are due to hand back Basra airport in the south.

Some Iraqis welcome the long-awaited transition but others fear that little will alter on the ground, with US forces scheduled to be in Iraq for another three years and the green zone remaining a walled-off compound.

Major-General Mohammed al-Askari, the Iraqi Defence Ministry spokesman, said January 1 was an important day, marking the moment that US and British troops in Iraq come under Iraqi government authority after the expiry yesterday of a UN Security Council resolution that has legitimised their presence since 2003.

"It is time that we Iraqis get our sovereignty," he said. "It will be a joy that Iraq has started to rise again and will resume its natural status."

This morning, US and Iraqi officials will ceremonially sign documents enshrining the handover of power in the green zone, a 10 sq km area that houses Iraqi government buildings, the British Embassy and a sprawling new US Embassy, where all US diplomats have now moved.

"We as an army feel that we were in a race and we have won the race and are now receiving our prize," said Major-General al-Askari.

The Iraqi Army was disbanded after the war but has since been rebuilt, and has more than 250,000 troops.

Soldiers from the Baghdad Brigade will take over responsibility for the green zone, although US forces and Peruvian guards working for a security company contracted to the US Government will still help to man some checkpoints.

Many buildings have already been handed back to the Iraqi authorities, including several US military camps.

More will be vacated in the months ahead as the foreign part of the green zone - which also has a large residential area in which ordinary Iraqis and families of Iraqi officials live - shrinks into several secured pockets.

The most symbolic gesture is the handover of the Republican Palace, a vast, marble mansion, complete with a swimming pool and sweeping driveway. A canteen that served hot paninis to diplomats, military officers and visiting journalists fed its last customers this week, while a Starbucks-style coffee shop in a huge, marble-floored meeting hall also closed.

Taking over the palace after the invasion placed the US seat of power in a building linked intrinsically to the regime of Saddam Hussein.

Even after sovereignty was handed back to a nascent Iraqi Government in June 2004, the palace remained a mark of the occupation, used for US embassy work and by hundreds of US, British, Australian and other coalition forces who operated in rooms in which Saddam's initials were often engraved in the wall.

Today's return of the palace to Iraqi control is part of a security accord between Baghdad and Washington finalised in December. The deal also maps out a timetable for US troops to withdraw from towns and cities by the middle of this year and to leave the country completely by the end of 2011.

Britain signed its own status of forces agreement with Iraq on Tuesday, barely 24 hours before the UN mandate expired. Under its terms, the remaining British presence of some 4200 personnel will leave Iraq by the end of July.

Australia, which has 42 staff officers in Baghdad, sealed a similar deal, while the other entities with contingents in Iraq - Estonia, Romania and Nato - have been given extra time to conclude the process. El Salvador has already started to move out its 280-strong force.

The scheduled exit of foreign troops and the increased authority of the Iraqi Government should give Iraq its greatest sense of sovereignty since March 2003.

Mohamad al-Bethani, 30, an Iraqi contractor who works in the green zone, said: "I believe that Iraq is going to become more sovereign. Every day I see many signs that the Iraqis are being handed power."

Ahmad Jaseeb, a mechanic in Baghdad, disagrees, saying that the handover gestures are "just for the media to show that the Americans are following the security agreement and the Iraqi Government is working to become more sovereign. That will never happen until the last US soldier leaves Iraq."

mcgreen311
01-01-2009, 05:38 AM
I sincerely hope this is a sign of a bettering situation. Like the quote by Jaseeb at the end of the article, I do wonder if it is more for show, but I also hope it will not lead to any other destabilization.

I suppose it's easier to have a wait and see attitude if one is not living in the midst of it all.

Howlin' Wolf
01-01-2009, 05:11 PM
one of my fondest memories in Iraq was riding in a van every morning to my job and stopping by the ice seller person and buying a huge block of ice and chopping it up and putting it in a cooler. The Iraqi people deserve their sovereignty, and while our motives of invading were of pure greed, I hope that Iraq will be a better place because of our greed.

Aussie3rddayfan
01-01-2009, 09:19 PM
Let's hope so.

Pouye
01-04-2009, 07:45 AM
The Iraqi people deserve their sovereignty,

As do the Israeli people... ;)

Rock

Howlin' Wolf
01-04-2009, 10:24 AM
As do the Israeli people... ;)

Rock

as do the palestinians

Pouye
01-05-2009, 08:22 AM
as do the palestinians

They were offered a state (which included Jerusalem) and rejected it. They can have a sovereign nation/state anywhere they can settle and defend their territory (that is the rules of nation building for all nations). But if a people group cannot organise themselves into a nation and protect themselves, there are no rules that say they have the inherent right to sovereignty. Sovereignty is earned and kept. Many sovereign nations have become extinct. What is left is refugees, like the Jewish people have been for almost 2000 years. They organised themselves into a nation and now defend themselves, which gives them the right to sovereignty like ever other nation.

Rock

Howlin' Wolf
01-05-2009, 10:48 AM
They were offered a state (which included Jerusalem) and rejected it. They can have a sovereign nation/state anywhere they can settle and defend their territory (that is the rules of nation building for all nations). But if a people group cannot organise themselves into a nation and protect themselves, there are no rules that say they have the inherent right to sovereignty. Sovereignty is earned and kept. Many sovereign nations have become extinct. What is left is refugees, like the Jewish people have been for almost 2000 years. They organised themselves into a nation and now defend themselves, which gives them the right to sovereignty like ever other nation.

Rock

Try researching the conditions of the offer and you too would have rejected it. And by your logic, maybe one day they will rise up and take back what was theirs to begin with. Dont let that destroy your faith since it seems to be hand in hand with Israel.

phil_ur_friend
01-06-2009, 12:38 PM
...what was theirs to begin with...

You are kidding...:rolleyes:

Pouye
01-06-2009, 12:48 PM
You are kidding...:rolleyes:

My thoughts exactly.

Technically the land belonged to the Canaanites, but God decided they weren't the best ones for it. He promised the land to Abraham, who then willed it to Isaac. Isaac then willed it to Jacob (Israel).

This is Bible 101.

Rock

phil_ur_friend
01-06-2009, 01:00 PM
Apparently the Old Testament is a left side book-end for the New Testament...

Howlin' Wolf
01-06-2009, 05:31 PM
My thoughts exactly.

Technically the land belonged to the Canaanites, but God decided they weren't the best ones for it. He promised the land to Abraham, who then willed it to Isaac. Isaac then willed it to Jacob (Israel).

This is Bible 101.

Rock

So the UN should use the bible to govern the world and decide who gets what land? Furthermore, the land was given to thei heirs of Abraham. Try reading Galatians to figure out who is an heir. Oh, thats right!! Valpo already posted that for you and it was ignored.

you and your idiot brother in law never cease to amaze me.

phil_ur_friend
01-06-2009, 06:27 PM
So the UN should use the bible to govern the world and decide who gets what land? Furthermore, the land was given to thei heirs of Abraham. Try reading Galatians to figure out who is an heir. Oh, thats right!! Valpo already posted that for you and it was ignored.

you and your idiot brother in law never cease to amaze me.

Are you suggesting that the U.N. is more powerful than Almighty God?
Exactly!
...it's not up to them, or anyone else...

God will fulfill His promise.
Regardless of your ridiculous misinterpretations of scripture.


Have you... ever read the Bible?

Howlin' Wolf
01-06-2009, 06:30 PM
Are you suggesting that the U.N. is more powerful than Almighty God?
Exactly!
...it's not up to them, or anyone else...

God will fulfill His promise.
Regardless of your ridiculous misinterpretations of scripture.


Have you... ever read the Bible?
Galatians 3

15Brothers, let me take an example from everyday life. Just as no one can set aside or add to a human covenant that has been duly established, so it is in this case. 16The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say "and to seeds," meaning many people, but "and to your seed," meaning one person, who is Christ. 17What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise. 18For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer depends on a promise; but God in his grace gave it to Abraham through a promise.

26You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, 27for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

PWN3D!

phil_ur_friend
01-06-2009, 06:45 PM
So what you are telling me is that Israel is the same as any other country?

Howlin' Wolf
01-06-2009, 06:49 PM
So what you are telling me is that Israel is the same as any other country?


No, thats what Paul has been telling you.

phil_ur_friend
01-06-2009, 07:18 PM
No, thats what Paul has been telling you.

Oh, so you and Paul are homies...He's like your "dog" and such.

Howlin' Wolf
01-06-2009, 07:20 PM
Oh, so you and Paul are homies...He's like your "dog" and such.

Did you learn to ignore scripture like that from Rock?

phil_ur_friend
01-06-2009, 07:37 PM
Did you learn to ignore scripture like that from Rock?

Rock knows more about scripture (and wholly embraces it)
than you do about losing popularity contests;
and I am sure that expounding upon that word picture isn't necessary for anyone here,
save you-
In that, I won't waste my cyberspace breath. ;)

Phil, your friend

Pouye
01-10-2009, 06:34 AM
I am still awaiting an answer...

Does it pertain to your feelings on this topic?

I'm talking to you mister wolf.

Phil

After meeting you, Phil (you're a big dude! -- 6'4, 200 pounds, almost all lean muscle), I know that "mister wolf" wouldn't say that to your face. It is good that he encrypted it. I know what it means, and so does google... ;)

Even so, I know Howlin' Wolf, and he takes a lot more liberty than most on the internet. He's called me names before, too (and I think I've called him a jerk before, or maybe worse in one exchange...) but he isn't that serious. He even once told everyone on this forum that he says a lot of thing on the net that people take way too seriously. He's actually helped me to lighten up a little and not get offended so easily. I'm not making excuses here, just saying that some people come across more brash and even disrespectful than others, especially on the web. I know I have a tendency to get more bold online than in person -- sometimes "speaking" my mind in the "heat of the moment". The face-to-face input from the other person is absent, so it is easy to imagine something written with the person sitting there with mad face. They could be writing something tongue-in-cheek, or not really very seriously, but there is no way to detect that in written communication (unless smileys are used, etc.).

Rock