Michael Yon

Wow..thats just great. I would NEVER have given in on that. Now, you may think twice before pulling the trigger, and that may cost you your life. Maliki wants us gone so he could implement his "shia agenda"...where does that leave the Kurds? Why are we still shelling out billions when Iraq has a surplus in the billions? Why are we going to sell them [or give?] M1-Abrams tanks? So he can use them against the Kurds? The big winner in this mess is IRAN. They got thier "boy" in the top spot, and how long will this peace last? My bet is not long. There is a bigger problem in A-stan, and this has not been addressed in a long time. This is where the "roots" of islamic fundamentalism are, the kind that condones the murdering of innocents.

After reading the whole agreement, I find it actually spells out less information than most contracts. There are enough loopholes we could float the entire third fleet through. I also see little value of this for the United States and its military personnel. It is a financial windfall to Iraq with us providing all the financing. I found no direct referral to the 8 billion embassy we built or any comments regarding a long term diplomatic relationship. Essentially I find the agreement to be vague and essentially worthless. U just do not see the upside as unlike Michael, I do not have the same strong respect for the "integrity' of the Iraq government. Time to close up shop, pick up our toys and come home. These systems, people and infrastructure are needed in Afghanistan.

As with any aggreement, it is incumbent on the parties involved to live up to what they have signed on to do. My concern is that the Obama administration learn the lessons offered from Viet Nam, and not only live up to this Status of Forces Agreement with Iraq, but also continue to ensure that Iraq will not become a failed nation state. Iraq's location in central southwest asia can either be a boon to regional stability, or a destabilizing influence should the hard work our armed forces have done be allowed to go for naught.

This means America can not rush out, but must be patient and remain engaged. It also means the Government of Iraq must buy into building a nation of their own. Wether it is a democracy or other form of government, the Iraqis need to become a force for stability and growth, for their own people, and their neighbors.

I agree with the above posts that state concern that any operations conducted by our forces must be in accordance with a 'Ministerial Committee'. That we need to abide by 'International Law' is not, in itself, troubling. It is what entity would be judging whether we are doing this, or not, is...

WHAT are you naysayers reading??? This looks quite standard to me; we leave them to finish building their new nation, but will continue to be available to help if they need us. We've helped the Iraqi people give birth to their new nation, now we step back a bit and hand-hold only as necessary while they learn to stand on their own two feet. Diplomatically helping them strip themselves of the burdens of Saddam's legacy was certainly to be expected at this juncture. You didn't really think this was ever about oil, did you, Bush-haters? The birth of a new democratic nation of free, self-sufficient citizens is a beautiful thing. We should all be proud!!
To read anything dire into this is to seek to pull defeat from the jaws of victory. Give it up anti-American readers, this war is truly and finally won, mission accomplished.

And Michael, THANKS, and Merry Christmas to you!!!

Nobody knows how things will eventually turn out in Iraq. It seems inevitable there will eb rough spots as various interest groups work out their relationship with each other one way or another. For the US to have a a long term presence in the country would smack of occupation, so it seems best to formalize a departure protocol. The agreement recently signed is such a protocol.

We can only hope that Iraq will be better place to live after we leave than it was before we came, and that history will eventually view our actions in Iraq as contributing to improvement rather than deterioration of conditions. War was never the first option, and the WMD excuse used to "sell" the invasion left the impression we had gone to war by mistake when it didn't pan out. Never the less, Saddam was a deplorable tyrant and few would argue that the world is not well rid of him.

The greater problem is the seemingly worldwide predilection of fanatics trying to make an obscure political or pseudo-religious point by slaughtering innocent people. Too often the excuse given is defense of Islam. It doesn't say much for the value of Islam. I have no idea whether most Muslims find that regrettable or not.

I for one would enjoy a more peaceful world. It seems unlikely, but it would be nice. Making this comment longer probably wouldn't help much, so I won't.

From what I can see there is significant wiggle room for both parties. In the end, President Obama merely has to give a written request to terminate the agreement and 12 months later, it's terminated. It is in our best interest that Iraq succeed. A new democracy will have many failures before it takes hold. Let us not forget that we have paid a dear price in blood shed and lives lost as well as the Iraqi people. Let them not be in vain! It looks to me like both parties put a lot of thought into this and did their best to consider all angles. There is wiggle room, as I see it. You have to read the whole thing carefullly. Iraq has jurisdiction.....but it doesn't. As the mom of a soldier over there, I would just as soon he come home. It's a waste of manpower at this point, except for those directly involved in training the Iraqi Security Forces. They are sorely needed in Afghanistan and we have much ground to make up there and must win that war! I don't believe we are welcome in Iraq, so my feeling is.....send my son and everybody elses home. On the other hand, can we afford for them to fail????

Those on the left will wonder how this agreement could be made by Bush administration.
It does seem to be missing a "thank you" and offer of payment of any expenses incurred while liberating Iraq from a tyrant and getting the utilities, etc working.
Michael, thanks for your great reporting and filling a hole left by the usual media.
Say hi to the 173rd in Afganistan for me.
John - A\4\503 173rd Abn Bde 1970-71

I guess that's progress, anyway. The Iraqi Government has come a long way from 2006 when I got there. We've had to drag them kicking and screaming into success but they are going to make it. Not because the central government is solid but because the local councils are able to hold the central government accountable.

As far as this agreement, it is a stop gap measure done by politicians. Face it, the military hasn't been "fighting" this conflict since 2003. The military has taken a State Department role as nation builders. There are BCT commanders who are/were the true government in their AO's. I feel this agreement is a result of that. Iraq wants the best of all worlds because we have bent over backwards to make sure they have had it over the last three years. Now, just like any other previous socialistic/communistic government, they want it all. It's going to take time, but this will work.

I don't see How does this agreement benefits the USA, it's troops or contractors? It doesn't!
I think this agreement stinks and that we should renegoiate or pull out - period.
No one other than our US Commanders should EVER have control over our troops at any time. No UN or Iraqi, no outside governance.
The civilian contractors should never be subject to Iraqi law or their courts, we all know how that would play out in the end. Don't we!

It looks to me they want us out, forgive all their debt, assume the cost of reconstruction (what we have already done) with no requirement for reimbursement, keep all their oil and gas revenues, and have us pay to support them through 2011. Maybe it is time for us to pull up stakes and let them have their country back. We can send the troops and material to Afghanistan and finish what we started over there. And as we leave, send them a bill for all the blood our people have shed in their name. I feel sorry for the Iraqi people to have to deal with their new arrogant, egotistical, and idiotic politicians like ours. These are the poor people who are going to pay the price now.

When I hear our troops being governed by "international law", I become very nervous. I am also concerned when it seems that Iraq is controlling missions, strategy and can prosecute our soldiers and their associates. I believe with this, the has come to withdraw swiftly and without further exposure of our men and women to the wiles of those who at one time elected Sadaam Hussein "unanimously".

I think we tried this in Viet Nam? The Iraqi government is a joke and once again we are going to get screwed.
They don't have the will to cooperate with us, each other, or anyone else.
Its over.