breaking: Bush signs agreement to defend Iraq from U.S.

Link

"Now that it's clear that Iran has no nuclear weapons, the principal threat to Iraq is America," said al Maliki, "and this agreement with Mr. Bush should help protect us from them."

"The only country to invade the Land of Two Rivers in the last 360 years is the United States, and they've done it twice. They are really our only foe, and President Bush, with this pact, will protect us from them."

"Our country has been shattered twice by the Americans; a million of our people are dead, and 4 million have lost their homes. Our schools are painted, but we have no doctors, no water, no electricity, no colleges, no garbage pickup...Iraq cannot undergo another American attack."

At the White House, US "war czar" Lieutenant-General Douglas Lute said "The basic message here should be clear: Iraq is increasingly able to stand on its own; that’s very good news, but the U.S. menace is still very real." Lute told reporters in a briefing on the tentative accord.
The Bush-Maliki agreement was also expected to raise eyebrows with one provision that cited the need to promote the flow of international capital to Iraq but "especially American investments".
While Maliki said any final agreement would require the Iraqi Parliament’s approval, Lute said the accord would not need backing from the US Congress, which is in the hands of Bush’s Democratic foes. "It says right on its face: "not for poor sports like Joe Biden."

Asked for details, White House spokesperson Dana Porqua stated that President Bush was only briefed on the agreement in August.

•  fryday funnys/not n/t

  by seesdifferent on Fri Dec 07, 2007 at 03:00:25 PM PDT

  •  The darkest of dark humor..Hilarious and tragic

    If only evury person could see the horror, blood, pain, suffering..Or would it evun matter any more..That is sad

    by Johnny Rapture on Fri Dec 07, 2007 at 03:17:51 PM PDT

•  I don't trust Cheney

  to respect this international agreement. He might decide to reinvade unilaterally.

  by revbludge on Fri Dec 07, 2007 at 03:09:11 PM PDT

  •  That would mean we would have to fire on

    ourselves. Would that constitute

    1. Unfriendly Friendly Fire

    2. Friendly Unfriendly Fire

    by JML9999 on Fri Dec 07, 2007 at 03:42:27 PM PDT

•  these guys could screw this up, too

  and end up unilaterally invading the US under the flimsiest and most egregiously suspect legal authority, and occupying it ineffectively and corruptly for years, allowing all sorts of vermin stooges to become high-ranking officials who would rape and bankrupt the country, destroying its proud heritage, all the while proudly proclaiming how much progress they were making....

  Whoops!  Too late!

  by kay dub on Fri Dec 07, 2007 at 03:29:13 PM PDT

•  I have met the enemy and he is US:Pogo nt

  by JML9999 on Fri Dec 07, 2007 at 03:40:29 PM PDT

•  That's a great first link! EOM.

  by BalanceSeeker on Fri Dec 07, 2007 at 03:41:31 PM PDT