Thread: Iraq/Dinar News. 09/05 to 01/14/07

Bush, Al-Maliki Meeting Postponed on Day When Leaked Memo Casts Doubt on Iraqi Prime Minister, Al-Sadr Followers Stage Walkout


AMMAN, Jordan — President Bush's scheduled face-to-face with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki was abruptly shelved Wednesday night, a casualty either of a reluctance to include Jordan's King Abdullah II — as the Iraqis explained — or, fallout from the leak of a secret White House memo that questioned the Iraqi leader's ability to govern.

In a tortured explanation backing up the Iraqi version of events, White House officials told reporters that it was decided the three-person meeting was "in the end not the optimal way to spend the president's time," and it would not have been as productive as the previously scheduled separate bilateral meetings between the leaders.

While U.S. officials were vague about the sequence of events that led to cancellation of Wednesday's meeting, they insisted that it was agreed upon by all three leaders, though the call about the change of plans was made to Air Force One while Bush was still traveling from Riga, Latvia.

"Since the King of Jordan and the prime minister had a bilateral themselves earlier today, everyone believed that it negated the purpose of the three of them to meet tonight together in a trilateral setting," White House adviser Dan Bartlett told reporters traveling with Bush.

The explanation, offered in detail several hours after the fact, resembled one given by an Iraqi lawmaker traveling with al-Maliki in Amman. Redha Jawad Taqi, a senior aide of top Shiite politician Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim said the Iraqis balked at the three-way meeting after learning that King Abdullah wanted to broaden the talks to include the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Two senior officials traveling with al-Maliki, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the information, said the prime minister had been reluctant to travel to Jordan in the first place and decided, once in Amman, that he did not want "a third party" involved in talks about subjects specific to the U.S.-Iraqi relationship.

"We insisted that the meeting be canceled," said one of the officials. "Iraq does not need a third party to be involved."

The delay comes after the high-stakes summit was marred by a public disclosure of Bush administration doubts about al-Maliki's ability to control sectarian growing violence and a walkout of Iraq's coalition government by 30 parliamentarians loyal to radical anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.

Six Cabinet ministers also suspended their participation in the government saying their action was necessary because the meeting in Jordan constituted a "provocation to the feelings of the Iraqi people and a violation of their constitutional rights." Their statement did not explain that claim.

Bartlett denied that the delay had anything to do with a New York Times report Wednesday that said White House National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley wrote in a classified Nov. 8 memo that al-Maliki's "capabilities are not yet sufficient" to control sectarian violence that has spread unabated throughout Iraq. Hadley also recommended steps to strengthen al-Maliki's position. The memo was written after an Oct. 30 trip to Baghdad.

"The reality on the streets of Baghdad suggests Maliki is either ignorant of what is going on, misrepresenting his intentions, or that his capabilities are not yet sufficient to turn his good intentions into action," the Times quoted the memo as saying.

Click here to read the New York Times story.

Click here to read the text of the memo.

The White House won't respond to the leaked memo because it is classified, but Press Secretary Tony Snow didn't exactly dispute it either.

"The president has confidence in Prime Minister Maliki, and also the administration is working with the prime minister to improve his capabilities in terms of dealing with the fundamental challenges in Iraq, which are security concerns, economic growth, political reconciliation and regional diplomacy," Snow said.

But Snow appeared surprised when news broke about the delay. Boarding the motorcade for the trip to the Jordanian monarch's palace, he said discussions were still being had about whether a photo-op Wednesday night would include al-Maliki.

A senior administration official reacting on condition of anonymity said that, taken as a whole, the memo is an expression of support for al-Maliki.

"You have a constant reiteration of the importance of strengthening the Maliki government, the need to work with him, to augment his capabilities," the official said.

He added that Bush and al-Maliki have a "personal relationship" that allows them to "talk candidly about the challenges."

Another official, also speaking anonymously because of the classified nature of the memo, told the Times that it was not "a slap in the face, but it's how do we grow his capability."

Bush and al-Maliki are scheduled to get together Thursday in a session meant to examine ways to curb the violence in Iraq, where the United States has about 139,000 troops.

Bartlett said the king and the prime minister had met before Bush arrived from a NATO summit and the three-way talk on Wednesday night was supposed to be "a social meeting." Bush's meeting with King Abdullah proceeded as scheduled, and the two had dinner together without Al-Maliki, who was not scheduled to be at that event.

U.S. officials said the dinner discussion revolved around the situation in Lebanon, where political killings are undermining the U.S.-backed Saniora government, and Syria's role in it. They also discussed the Israeli-Palestianian situation. Officials said Iraq was never supposed to be the topic of dinner conversation.

Bartlett said despite the delay, he is sure al-Maliki and Bush to have "robust" talks Thursday and we can "expect a lot of give and take."

The meetings scheduled Wednesday and Thursday aim at halting Iraq's escalating sectarian violence and paving the way for a reduction of American troops.

"We are sticking to our position. ... The boycott is still valid," Falih Hassan, a Sadrist legislator, said in an interview with The Associated Press. "Bush is a criminal who killed a lot of Iraqis and we do not want him to interfere in Iraq's affairs. The Iraqi government should negotiate with the U.N. Security Council, not with the leader of the country that is occupying Iraq."

In New York on Tuesday, U.N. Security Council voted unanimously to extend for one year the mandate of the 160,000-strong multinational force in Iraq.

The Security Council responded to a request from al-Maliki, who said a top government priority is to assume full responsibility for security and stability throughout Iraq but that it needs more time.

The White House is avoiding directly pressuring al-Maliki to do more to stop the bloodshed, or impose directives. Instead, Bush is expected to ask the prime minister for ideas on how to train Iraqi forces faster so they can shoulder more responsibility for securing the nation against sectarian extremists, and hear how he plans to mend his nation's bitter Sunni-Shia divide.

The meeting was to take place at the Raghadan Palace, high on a hill in the Jordanian capital.

"We will discuss the situation on the ground in his country, our ongoing efforts to transfer more responsibility to the Iraqi security forces, and the responsibility of other nations in the region to support the security and stability of Iraq," Bush said Tuesday while attending the NATO summit in Riga.

"We'll continue to be flexible, and we'll make the changes necessary to succeed. But there's one thing I'm not going to do: I'm not going to pull our troops off the battlefield before the mission is complete."

The planned meeting with al-Maliki is part of a new flurry of diplomacy the Bush administration has undertaken across the Middle East. Hadley's memo suggests that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice hold a meeting for Iraq and its neighbors in the region early next month.

After the Bush-al-Maliki summit, Rice is staying behind in the region for talks with Palestinian, and possibly, Israeli leaders, who agreed last weekend on a cease-fire to end five months of fighting in the Gaza Strip.

Hadley suggested in his memo that the United States could step up is efforts to get Saudi Arabia to take a leadership role in supporting Iraq, the Times reported. Hadley said Saudi Arabia could use its influence to move Sunni populations in Iraq out of violence and into politics, cut off any public or private funding provided to the insurgents or death squads from the region and lean on Syria to terminate its support for Baathists and insurgent leaders.

Iraqi officials say the United States wants other Sunni governments in the area, such as Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt, to persuade moderate Sunnis in Iraq to line up with al-Maliki. That would give him political clout he needs to challenge radical militias trying to undermine his authority.

Those three governments also are urging the United States to resume its role as mediator in the long-festering conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians, an issue that prejudices relations throughout the region.

Back in Washington, the Iraq Study Group, a bipartisan panel created to recommend a new way forward in Iraq, were meeting for a third day. The independent panel, set to issue a report next month, did not reach a consensus Tuesday on how many or how long U.S. troops should remain in Iraq, forcing the group to return for a third day of debate.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Pace: No Plan to Move Troops Out of Al-Anbar, But Other Movement Coming

WASHINGTON — Military advisers are considering shifting U.S. troops around within Iraq, but the United States has no intention of throwing in the towel to Al-Anbar, the most violent of Iraq's 18 provinces, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Peter Pace said Wednesday.

Asked specifically whether serious consideration is being given to the idea of abandoning Al-Anbar to put more U.S. forces in Baghdad, Pace bluntly replied "no."

"You gave me a very straight question. I gave you a very straight answer. No. Why would we want to forfeit any part of Iraq to the enemy? We don't," he told reporters at a Pentagon briefing.

"It is our goal to turn over every province in Iraq to the Iraq security forces under the command and control of the Iraq government. That is our goal. There is no immediate thought to moving all coalition forces out of Al Anbar province and turning over right now today all security in Al Anbar to Iraqi security forces. It's not on the table," he added.

Pace's response to questioning followed an ABC News report Tuesday that said Pentagon officials are considering "a major strategic shift in Iraq" that would move the 30,000 U.S. forces, mostly Marines, from the dangerous Sunni-dominated province that has been the site of the most U.S. casualties during the Iraq engagement.

reported that the thinking builds off a memo first reported in a Washington Post story. In it, senior Marine Intelligence Officer in al-Anbar Col. Peter Devlin is quoted as saying "Despite the success of the December elections, nearly all government institutions from the village to provincial levels have disintegrated or have been thoroughly corrupted and infiltrated by Al Qaeda in Iraq."

Faced with that situation, ABC reported, Pace is considering turning al-Anbar over to Iraqi security forces and moving U.S. troops into Iraq's capital.

One Marine Corps source told FOX News it doesn't seem to make sense to pull military personnel from the most violent part of Iraq outside of Baghdad and the report doesn't reflect "recent thinking."

With that said, senior military officials appear to agree that securing Baghdad is the first priority, and Anbar province comes second.

Prior to Pace's meeting, senior defense officials said three battalions — roughly 2,000 U.S. troops — are being shifted from more peaceful parts of Iraq to Baghdad. No timetable was offered when they would be arriving in the capital city, but some of those being moved are already in close proximity.

Officials said those troops are not being shifted from Al-Anbar, but the movement does reflect the priority of securing Baghdad. The 3rd Stryker Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division will move from Mosul in northern Iraq, down to Baghdad to replace a Stryker brigade that has gone home to Alaska.

The 4th Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division is moving into Iraq and heading up to Mosul to take its place, officials said.

Four more battalions of U.S. troops are also being scheduled to go to Iraq early next year to boost security in Baghdad, senior defense officials said Wednesday. The extra combat engineer battalions of reserves would total about 3,500 troops, officials said. The units will come from around the United States and have already done a tour in Iraq, the officials said, but no decision has been made yet which units will be sent.

Currently, 139,000 U.S. service members are stationed in Iraq. About 20,000 are positioned around Baghdad.

Pace said Gen. George Casey, commander of the Multi-national Force in Iraq, can move troops around the battlefield as he sees fit to meet the tactical situation on the ground in Iraq.

"That is the province of General Casey," he said. "General Casey is working very closely with Prime Minister Maliki to ensure that the actions of the coalition forces and the actions of the Iraqi security forces are coordinated and that they support the political process that Prime Minister Maliki is striving to attain."

He added that "truth of the matter is, yes," officials are looking at shifting troops around within the country to achieve maximum security while enabling the political process to continue.

Pace said much of what has been leaking out from the planning meetings is "bits and pieces" that represent "one end of the spectrum or the other about all" that military advisers just back from Iraq have presented to Pentagon advisers.

"We are looking at the whole spectrum of possible military actions. And then we are analyzing that action against the desired outcome," he said.

"I'm not going to say to you where I am personally, nor where the chiefs are, because our responsibility is to give our best military advice. And as advisers, if we are to be heard and to have the trust of those to whom we're giving our advice, we need to be circumspect about what we say in public, how we say it, so that our ideas can be put into the other ideas," Pace added.

Click here for more FOXNews.com coverage of Iraq.

Sources who spoke with FOX News say the military community, as well as the Iraq Study Group and the National Security Council, are taking a serious look at the way forward in Iraq, and the military draws up all kinds of plans. A military planner said 99 percent of them never get executed. The ISG will release its recommendations Dec. 6.

The commission, led by former Secretary of State James A. Baker III and former Rep. Lee Hamilton, D-Ind., is widely expected to call for regional talks, including involvement by Syria and Iran. It remained unclear what it would recommend possible U.S. troop withdrawals. As of Tuesday, its members — five Democrats and five Republicans — were divided over the appropriate U.S. troop levels in Iraq, and whether and how to pull American forces out of the country, according to one official close to the panel's deliberations.

A second official has said that the commission was unlikely to propose a timetable for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq but that some members seemed to favor setting a date for only an initial withdrawal, an idea that has been pushed by many congressional Democrats.

It is Pace's job to provide the best possible military advice to the civilian leadership both the secretary of defense and President Bush, and a senior military official said one military axiom is to always go to the boss with three or four possible ways forward — with one being the desired plan and the rest being throwaways.

One source close to a senior military commander said top officers are still focused on the plan that Gen. John Abizaid, head of U.S. Central Command, discussed on Capitol Hill earlier this month in which he revealed military officials are considering seriously increasing the number of embedded U.S. training teams to make training of Iraqi forces "much more robust."

Pace said Abizaid was not talking about a timetable when he told Congress that it will take four to six months to see whether the United States can win in Iraq. Rather, the date was offered as a point on the calendar to measure how well training is going.

Pace added that he would not call the situation in Iraq a civil war because it doesn't meet the definition.

"Number one, the Iraq government does not call it a civil war. Two, the Iraq government is functioning. Three, the Iraq security forces are responsive to the Iraqi government. Four, the level of violence that's being inflicted by Al Qaeda and the like is specifically designed to create a civil war," he said.

"We spend a lot of time dancing on the head of a pin as far as what particular words we should use to describe the environment, which is currently unacceptable," Pace added. "From the macro viewpoint, the parts of a civil war, as I understand it, are not definable in today's environment. But that's really energy not well spent. Our energy ought to be spent on, where are we, where should we be, and how do we get from where we are to where we want to be."

FOX News' Mike Emanuel and The Associated Press contributed to this report .

Originally Posted by Par77

Bush, Al-Maliki Meeting Postponed on Day When Leaked Memo Casts Doubt on Iraqi Prime Minister, Al-Sadr Followers Stage Walkout

Yeah, it accidently got out, oops

Defense eyeing more deployments to Iraq

WASHINGTON - The Pentagon is developing plans to send four more battalions to Iraq early next year, partly to boost security in Baghdad, defense officials said Wednesday. Meanwhile, a commission studying Iraq policy said it would make its report next week.

The extra combat engineer battalions of reserves, likely to be sent to Baghdad, would total about 3,500 troops, officials said. They said the units, coming from around the United States, have already done tours in Iraq but there has been no final decision on which will go.

The moves come as violence continues to rise in Baghdad, and President Bush is under growing pressure to craft an exit strategy that would withdraw a substantial number of U.S. troops from Iraq while shifting more responsibility to the Iraqi government. The Iraq Study Group, a bipartisan commission looking into Iraq war policy, said it will release its report to the president, Congress and the public on Dec. 6.

The commission, led by former Secretary of State James A. Baker III and former Rep. Lee Hamilton, D-Ind., is widely expected to call for regional talks as part of its recommendations, including involvement by Syria and Iran. The Bush administration has been reluctant to engage those two countries, which it says have abetted the violence in Iraq.

It remained unclear what the group would recommend regarding possible U.S. troop withdrawals. As of Tuesday, its members — five Democrats and five Republicans — were divided over the appropriate U.S. troop levels in Iraq, and whether and how to pull American forces out, according to one official close to the panel's deliberations.

A second official has said that the commission is unlikely to propose a timetable for withdrawing all U.S. troops but that some members seem to favor setting a date for an initial withdrawal, an idea that has been pushed by many congressional Democrats.

There are 139,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, with some 20,000 in and around Baghdad.

At a Pentagon press conference, Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, would not say whether more troops are planned for Baghdad, but he did say that was among many ideas commanders are debating. He said there was no plan to shift all troops out of the volatile Anbar Province into Baghdad.

Pace was asked if the advice of generals is becoming less important because of the upcoming Iraq Study Group report and the fact that power in Congress has shifted to Democrats, some of whom have been critical of the war.

"This is a very complex problem, and the more 10-pound brains we can bring to bear on the problem for our nation, the better," Pace said.

The Pentagon's decisions on which reserve battalions to send to Iraq next year would depend on how long the units had already served on the battlefront, because the Pentagon is trying to not break a policy of deploying troops no longer than 24 months on the ground in Iraq. The decision-making process was described by defense officials who requested anonymity because the plans have not yet been announced.

In addition, military leaders are shifting brigades within Iraq. The officials said they are moving a Stryker Brigade into Baghdad to help shore up security there. The 3rd Stryker Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division will move from Mosul in northern Iraq, down to Baghdad to replace a Stryker brigade that has gone home to Alaska.

Portions of the 2nd Brigade, 1st Infantry Division are moving into Iraq and heading up to Mosul to take its place, officials said.

In another development, former CIA Director Robert Gates, President Bush's nominee for defense secretary, endorsed the idea of engaging Iran and Syria for help in stabilizing increasingly violent Iraq, an opinion somewhat at odds with Bush's.

Gates made the comments in response to a questionnaire from the Senate Armed Services Committee, which is to hold a confirmation hearing next week.

"War planning should be done with the understanding that post-major combat phase of operations can be crucial," Gates said in a 65-page written response submitted to the committee Tuesday.

"If confirmed, I intend to improve the department's capabilities in this area," he said. "With the advantage of hindsight, I might have done some things differently."

Gates also appeared to subtly criticize the invasion of Iraq.

"I believe the use of pre-emptive force should be based on very strong evidence," he said.

Defense eyeing more deployments to Iraq - Yahoo! News

Dinar-Excited

Originally Posted by kiko

Thanks Susie. Coming two weeks are more exciting then ever.

Indeed, let's not name the month for Charmed. We can name it from friday!

It will be a very nice christmas for us all at the rolclub here.

Well, I gonna sleep now and we meet tommorow again!

Thanks for not using the "D" word.....Friday you can say it but I might not be online since I will most likely be at the bank....

The postponement of the talks Bush and Maliki to Thursday

(Voice of Iraq) - 11-29-2006
This issue was sent to a friend
Amman (Reuters) - American officials said on Wednesday that American President George W. Bush for talks with Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki in Jordan on Thursday.

It was expected that the two leaders held a meeting with the Jordanian monarch, King Abdullah then dealt dinner with King after that and arrived in Amman for talks on Iraq.

He said the White House advisor, Dan Edward reporters, "what was the king of Jordan and the Prime Minister held bilateral talks earlier today (I BET THEY HASHED OUT ALL THE DETAILS BEFORE BUSH GOT THERE....MY THEORY) was of the view that all have been defeated with the purpose of meeting the three of the night in the tripartite talks."

Originally Posted by Hslvrl9g

Yes, they(HSBC) have a 80% share in Dar es Salaam Bank. I have been trying to open an account with them and I have had NO luck!! Any one have a connection for Dar es Salaam in Iraq?

H-Silverlinning

Here is official ISX site:

Iraq Stock Exchange Web Site

Go to Brokers, then broker information. You'll see a list of banks and bank contact information...here is what they list for Dar al Salaam:

DarAl-Salam Bank
Al-Sadoon Park / Al-Nadhal Street Sec (103) ,St (41), Buld (3)
7177703
[email protected]

Hope this helps, OSWoman

11/29/06 -- 11:25 AM

Marines order communications units for Iraq operations
By Patience Wait, GCN Staff



Story Tools: Print this | Email this | Purchase a Reprint | Link to this page






The Marine Corps Systems Command has awarded a $45.6 million contract to General Dynamics Corp. of Falls Church, Va., for 150 communications units under the Tactical Data Network Data Distribution System-Replacement (TDN DDS-R) program, according to company officials.

The communications equipment will provide deployed Marine forces with a modular, scalable Internet Protocol (IP) data transport capability for high-speed transfer of electronic data among users throughout a Marine Air Ground Task Force, similar to local- and wide-area networks created by businesses to share, transfer and store data and files.

“DDS-R provides the Marine Corps with the tactical communications technologies they need,” said John Martin, vice president and general manager of communication networks for General Dynamics C4 Systems, the division that received the order. “The new equipment will simplify access to network data for warfighters on the ground and will be interoperable with existing equipment to protect the Marines’ investments.”

TDN DDS, the existing system, provides a standardized suite of high-reliability automated data processing equipment and communication systems designed for use in a tactical environment. The TDN DDS-R will be a component of the overall Tactical Data Network and provides IP-based data routing, information processing and storage capabilities. The system, which includes rack-mounted computer equipment housed in portable transit cases, also provides an extension of the Defense Information System Network (DISN) Secret Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNet) and Non-secure Internet Protocol Router Network (NIPRNet), as well as coalition and joint-forces networking capabilities.

Terms of the contract call for General Dynamics to design, integrate, test, produce and prepare associated documentation for DDS-R. The work is expected to be completed by March 2007.



More news

Leaked memo: US suggestions for Iraq's leader
Excerpts from a memo by national security adviser Stephen Hadley that was leaked to The New York Times:

"Steps Maliki Could Take ... There is a range of actions that [Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki] could take to improve the information he receives, demonstrate his intentions to build an Iraq for all Iraqis ...

"Compel his ministers to take small steps - such as providing health services and opening bank branches in Sunni neighborhoods - to demonstrate that his government serves all ethnic communities ... Bring his political strategy with Moktada al-Sadr to closure ... Announce plans to expand the Iraqi Army over the next nine months ... Declare the immediate suspension of suspect Iraqi police units ...

"What We Can Do to Help Maliki ... Continue to target Al Qaeda and insurgent strongholds in Baghdad to demonstrate the Shia do not need the [Mahdi Army] to protect their families ... Continue our diplomatic efforts to keep the Sunnis in the political process ... Seek ways to strengthen Maliki immediately by giving him additional control over Iraqi forces ...

"The above approach may prove difficult to execute even if Maliki has the right intentions. He may simply not have the political or security capabilities ... Pushing Maliki to take these steps without augmenting his capabilities could force him to failure ..."

Where's the part about revaluing the currency??

Here is something I was thinking about. I bet that King Abdullah and Maliki already have a plan and will present it to Bush tomorrow, this way they can tell their neighbor Arabs (especially the one's who are not crazy about the U.S.) that they worked everything out and here is the plan that way no one would be offended thinking Bush came in there and told them what to do.....guaranteed King Abdullah will do right by both leaders and it has to be economically advantageous!!!! What do you think???