Democrats Want To Stop Iraqi Prime Minister’s Visit To Congress

• July 26, 2006

Interesting…

WASHINGTON — House Speaker Dennis Hastert has rejected calls Tuesday by congressional Democrats to cancel an address Wednesday by Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to a joint session of Congress.
Hastert, R-Ill., told reporters that even if al-Maliki doesn’t apologize for earlier comments condemning Israel for its assault on Hezbollah terrorist targets in Lebanon, the prime minister “should address Congress. … The U.S. has 130,000 troops [in Iraq]” and Washington must maintain a dialogue with the Iraqi government.
Al-Maliki’s comments will “be part of that dialogue … and we should all, on a bipartisan basis, be there to engage him.”

Here’s what Al-Maliki said:

“The Israeli attacks and airstrikes are completely destroying Lebanon’s infrastructure,” Mr. Maliki said at an afternoon news conference inside the fortified Green Zone, which houses the American Embassy and the seat of the Iraqi government. “I condemn these aggressions and call on the Arab League foreign ministers’ meeting in Cairo to take quick action to stop these aggressions. We call on the world to take quick stands to stop the Israeli aggression.”

Now, just for the sake of comparison, here’s what rabid anti-war group Code Pink has to say about the Israeli/Hezbollah hostilities:

While the world is crying out for global intervention to stop the madness, our government is blocking the international community from calling for a ceasefire — confusing Israel’s right to defend itself with the choice to kill innocent civilians and blow up Lebanon’s bridges, airports and power stations.

See much of a different between the two statements?
Me neither.
Seems like Code Pink and Al-Maliki are on the same page when it comes to “Israeli aggression,” yet the Democrats want to deny Al-Maliki the opportunity to address congress even as they maintain their very close relationship with Code Pink.
Will the Democrats end their ties with Code Pink? I wouldn’t hold my breath.
Which just exposes this call from Democrats for what it is: rank political opportunism.
Al-Maliki is an elected leader in a region where anti-semitism is a political reality. When it comes to issues surrounding Israel, backing the Jews is political suicide. The Democrats know this, but if they can score some cheap political points by bashing the elected leader of Iraq (despite the toil of our soldiers which allowed the man to be elected) they’re going to do that.
Because it isn’t really about standing with Israel – if it were Democrats would be backing the Bush administration who is in turn backing the Jews in the Israeli/Hezbollah conflict – but rather about political point scoring.
Sort of like how the Democrats can’t ever admit that the economy is doing well or that something went right in Iraq. Doing so is devastating to their re-election campaigns, and they just can’t have that.

Tags: Domestic Issues, JD Donaghe, Lori Swanson, Red River Flood

http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

do you have confidence that Maliki is the right man to be leading Iraq at this crucial momment in that country’s history?

As opinionated as I may be. (no really); I pass because I have no idea.

BTW…I enjoy the rational debates and discussions with you and Mike A. and even RBB sometimes and would like to avoid the mudslinging believe it or not.
aNONOMISLY

DD, people in the Middle East are so fanatical that I’m not quite sure popular support is as good as it may appear to be. (e.g. Hamas has positive support, Hezbullah has strong support, Iran’s Elmadmandijad has popular support. ..Bin Laden has strong popular support.
robert108

aNON: So, when he says what backs your agenda, he’s telling the truth, but when he doesn’t, he’s just pandering? Sounds about right for leftie thinking to me. He wanted to speak to us, the Dems didn’t want him to. Fact. What is your spin on that?
He connected the dots on Iraq and worldwide terror, and even on 9/11. Kinda hard to swallow, eh?
Gregdn

I think this was a political ploy by the Dems to point up the fact that we’ve spent 2500 lives and billions of dollars to create just another Islamic government that hates us and the Israelis.
aNONOMISLY

I also like the nice rhetoric with which Maliki addressed our Congress today. al-jafari would have probably said the same thing all-in-all a nicely prepared rhetorical speech.

but certain uneasy facts still remain,

Maliki has also close ties with Iran and Syria

There has been little to no punishment the militias that have been fomenting secterian violence and the upsurge of killing in Iraq

..secterian violence has only gotten worst under his watch

He is very close with Sadr, the guy with the biggest Hezbullah like militia in Iraq.

…

the fact remains he is very much constrained in his power, and that he depends for support on those same militias responsible for most of the killings (kinda like Lebaonese government and it relations to Hezbullah)

his constituent and close allies are the ones responsible for most of the violence going on in Iraq today.

…

I like the rhetoric. I would have much prefer Maliki become the transformational leader Iraq sorely need but sadly lacks today, ..the Churhill/Reagan of Iraq if you will.

____

I’m also impressed by the many plans Malik has:

WaPo: More Q Than A on the Middle East

In any event, the two agreed that, whatever the challenges or problems, Maliki had a plan to fix them. Several plans, actually.

“The prime minister has laid out a comprehensive plan,” Bush said.

“The security plan for Baghdad has entered the second phase,” Maliki reported, also alluding to his “national reconciliation plan.” Maliki further clarified that “the circumstances that the Baghdad security plans or other plans related to Basra and other places are different in terms of circumstances from the previous plans.”

Even as Bush recited many of his favorite platitudes — “free and fair elections . . . vision for a free Iraq . . . the courage of the Iraqi people . . . extremists are brutal” — the body language was subdued, and there was little of the jocularity Bush displays when he’s feeling comfortable. The lone exception: a Bush nod and smile toward the American press corps when a reporter from al-Iraqiya, a network funded by the Pentagon and now the Iraqi government, rose to ask Maliki a gentle question.

I’m also afraid of Malik announcing his new plan. Every time Maliki announces a new planc things, the secterian violence in particular, only turn for the worst in Iraq, lol.
robert108

Contrast all the leftie lies with what he actually said to Congress, and you get the real reason why the Dems wanted to keep him from speaking. No cherry-picking, just the whole truth.

Read his own words, then decide for yourself:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/26/AR2006072600872.html
Puzzlefeet

No, we just can’t stand the fact that the “democratically” elected official of Iraq that we are funding has attacked our ally and then wants to stand in the well of our Congress and speak. There is a big difference between Code pink and Maliki. If you can’t see it then well…….
http://www.inthebullpen.com/ Chad Evans

“See much of a different between the two statements?”

Absolutely. Al-Maliki decries damage to the infrastructure yet doesn’t say anything about Israel intentionally targeting civilians. Code Pink on the other hand accuses Israel of, well, intentionally targeting civilians and Lebanon’s infrastructure. Both aren’t great, but Code Pink’s is far worse a statement to make in regards to a U.S. ally.
aNONOMISLY

r108, let me flatter you by saying I really like having frank discussion/debates with you and TW.

now I would like to ask you a question

do you have confidence that Maliki is the right man to be leading Iraq at this crucial momment in that country’s history?
TwoHotel9

I will now go all serious and say no. He is not. But he is the one riding the tiger, and this trip may well get his ass bit.
aNONOMISLY

pathetic political grand standing
aNONOMISLY

…notice how most Democrats actually did show up
___________

I think this was a political ploy by the Dems to point up the fact that we’ve spent 2500 lives and billions of dollars to create just another Islamic government that hates us and the Israelis.

while what you say above is sad, comments by Iraq’s Dennis Hastert seem to subtantiate it:

The speaker of the Iraqi Parliament criticized the American government’s involvement in Iraq on Saturday, likening the invasion and its consequences to “the work of butchers.
..
“We know there was a corrupt regime in Saddam, but a regime should be removed by surgery, not by butchering,” he said .. “The U.S. occupation is butcher’s work under the slogan of democracy and human rights and justice.”

(source: nyt.com
”

some other comments by the speaker thanking us for our great sacrifice we have made in the liberation of his country:

“I personally think whoever kills an American soldier in defense of his country would have a statue built for him in that country.”
____

“America didn’t come to the country for our sake. America came with a pure Zionist agenda.”

(source: ThinkProgress.com quoting the New York times
robert108

No wonder. The Dems and the MSM don’t want us to hear the truth; they want to keep feeing their lying crap to the public. Very revealing. They just can’t abide a diversity of opinion.
TwoHotel9

aNon, here is a query for you. A group of men grab you, sit you at a table, strech one arm out and begin hitting it with a stick, you resist this. They then begin hitting that arm with a small hammer, you resist this. They then begin hacking at your arm with an ax. At exactly what point in this chain of events do you give up and let them kill you?
Puzzlefeet

Actually I like what he had to say today in Congress. The problem is the government is in such disarray and the militias are in control that more and more American troops are going to be needed. So let’s them there as many as are needed not what is political, clear out the militias and get this done.
http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

clear out the militias and get this done.

idiotic
robert108

Of course, it would be imprudent to just come out and support a win for the US in Iraq and in the rest of the Middle East. Better to protect the ego by taking a pessimistic stance. It’s so much more sophisticated to be cynical about things.
robert108

It wasn’t rhetoric. Check your dictionary.
robert108

aNON: Thanks for the compliment. It is much appreciated. In answer to your question:

” …do you have confidence that Maliki is the right man to be leading Iraq at this crucial momment in that country’s history?”

I can only give a categorical answer. I accept that he is the product of the Iraqi selection process, and, at this time, that is a vast improvement over whatever has existed in Iraq in recorded history. I don’t know that absolute answers are possible to your question. He is the best man because he is who the Iraqis have selected. I doubt that he is the George Washington of Iraq, and that is what they really need. Having said that, he is their and our best hope at this moment, and should be treated as such by us. I’m not a fan of sniping; if someone has a better plan, then present it and get going on it, but don’t just fling out negativity as an excuse for a substantive argument. I have no illusions that Iraq will be like the US or GB in the immediate future, but a constitutional govt for them is a very big step, and for the ME at this moment. I want to see that spread. Terrorism is destructive; constitutional govt, especially with freedom and independence for the people, is constructive. Let’s emphasize that, shall we?
aNONOMISLY

HE has failed in one crucial test, which not allowing secterian violence to fester.

frankly, I’m iffy on Maliki and think he is simply the ‘face’ and that others in Iraq are pulling the string. Specially given the situation under which he was appointed/selected.

I feel he is much to constrained, much in the same way the Lebanese government is constrained under Hezbullah.

Muqtada al-Sadr (the leader of Iraq largest militia) and the Iranian born and raised Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani

Those people seem to be more alligned with Iran than with the United States, specially when it comes to ideology.

take a look at what I found in wikipeda when reseaching Muqtada al-Sadr’s militia, the Mahdi Army:

The Mahdi Army has also recently pledged military support to Iran if Iran were to be attacked by Western forces

(the citation given was this article in the Jerusalem post

I have little confidence he is a transformational leader and that he will be able to overcome those constrains under which he is in.
TwoHotel9

Just so! And then there are the considerations involved in hopping back into the pirranah filled pool back in Iraq. He is an intelligent and politically conservative man, he may actually put Iraq on the right track. Then again he may not make it back to the Green zone. He must lead Iraq into its next elections, and that is a most dangerous path.
aNONOMISLY

Maliki’s own party:

The Islamic Dawa Party or Islamic Call Party is, historically, a militant Shiite Islamic group and, presently, an Iraqi political party. Dawa and the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq are two of the main parties in the religious-Shiite United Iraqi Alliance, which won a plurality of seats in both the provisional January 2005 Iraqi election and the longer-term December 2005 election. The party is led by Ibrahim al-Jaafari, a doctor, who served as the Prime Minister of Iraq in the Iraqi Transitional Government from 2005 until May 20, 2006. The party’s deputy leader, Nouri al-Maliki, is the current Prime Minister of Iraq.

Al-Dawa rose to prominence in the 1970s, when it waged an armed campaign against the Iraqi government. In this period it also interacted with the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the future spiritual leader of Iran[and responsible for Iran's revolution], during his exile in Najaf in Iraq. It supported the Islamic Revolution in Iran and in turn received support from the Iranian government, especially during the Iran-Iraq War.

..

During the Iran-Iraq War, al-Dawa also committed violent acts against both Saddam Hussein’s government in Iraq and Western targets. It was widely viewed in the West as a terrorist organization in this period. It attempted to assassinate Tariq Aziz, Hussein’s longtime loyalist, in 1980; and attempted to assassinate Hussein himself in 1982 and 1987. In 1983 it simultaneously bombed the American and French embassies in Kuwait and several other domestic and foreign targets in Kuwait…. The bombing of the American embassy was an early instance of suicide bombing in the Middle East, following the examples that year of Hezbollah’s bombings of the American Embassy and Marine barracks in Lebanon.

…

Freeing the al-Dawa prisoners in Kuwait was one of the main objectives of a string of kidnappings and bombings perpetrated by Hezbollah over the next several years.

…

Most leaders of al-Dawa remained in exile in Iran and elsewhere until the American invasion of Iraq in 2003. During this period, some of its factions moved to SCIRI

No wonder al-Maliki refuses to critisize Hezbollah!!!
aNONOMISLY

…time warp that is the Middle East.
aNONOMISLY

I really do wish al-Maliki the best, (to do other wise would be lunatic), but I’m not confident on his leadership skills.
robert108

aNON: Here’s an idea. You are very good at examining data closely and pulling out the bits that lead to depressing conclusions. Just as an experiment, try the same technique with positive info, and see how it turns out. You don’t have to reveal it to anyone else, but devote the same energy to going positive instead of going negative. See how it could work instead of how it couldn’t work. Do it as an intellectual exercise, totally in private. Might be enlightening for you.
aNONOMISLY

…up in often time down in the warped place that is the Middle East.
aNONOMISLY

another ‘string-puller’ is the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq:

The Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI) is, historically, an Iraqi insurgent group backed by Iran during the Iran-Iraq war, and, presently, an Iraqi political party. Its political support comes from the country’s Shi’a Muslim community, as well as from Iranian Shiites and the Iranian government. Prior to August 2003, SCIRI was led by Ayatollah Mohammed Baqir al-Hakim; its current leader is the ayatollah’s brother, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim. In light of its gains in both elections and government appointments, SCIRI is one of Iraq’s most powerful political parties.

does the followind sound similar to Hezbullah:

It gained popularity among Shiite Iraqis by providing social services and humanitarian aid, following the pattern of Islamist organizations in other countries such as Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. SCIRI is alleged to receive money and weapons from Iran, and is often accused of being a proxy for Iranian interests. The party leaders have toned down many of the party’s public positions and committed it to democracy and peaceful cooperation. SCIRI’s power base is in the Shi’a-majority southern Iraq. It has an armed wing, the Badr Brigade, with an estimated strength of between 4,000 and 10,000 men.

it’s militia wing:

The Badr Organization originally the Badr Brigade or Bader Corps is the armed wing of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI). Headed by Hadi Al-Amiri it participated in the 2005 Iraqi election as part of the United Iraqi Alliance coalition. It’s members have entered the new Iraqi army and police force en masse and gained virtual control of Iraq’s Interior Ministry.
aNONOMISLY

Would you expect him to bite the hand that feed him while addressing it at its own house?

SayAnythingBlog.com

Democrats Want To Stop Iraqi Prime Minister’s Visit To Congress

Create a SAB Readerblog

Recent Comments