Posted on Mon, Apr. 19, 2004

Nader calls for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq

By MARIA RECIO
Knight Ridder Newspapers

WASHINGTON - Ralph Nader, the independent presidential hopeful, called Monday for the withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Iraq in six months.

Nader, who has sounded an anti-war theme since announcing his candidacy in February, laid out a three-point plan for withdrawal. He said he would create an international peacekeeping force under United Nations auspices, promote Iraqi self-rule through independent elections and provide humanitarian aid to stabilize the country.

"The key is this," Nader told reporters: "How do you separate the mainstream Iraqis from the insurgents when the mainstream Iraqis now are increasingly opposed to our presence there and increasingly, quietly or otherwise, supporting the insurgents?

"The way you do it is you declare you are getting out."

Nader sought to distance himself from both President Bush and presumptive Democratic nominee Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, whom he described as "pro-war candidates." Nader called himself the "muscular peace candidate."

By withdrawing from Iraq, Nader continued, "You're getting the oil companies out. You're getting all the foreign businesses that are replacing the Iraqi businesses, the truck drivers in Iraq who are angry because they see foreigners driving trucks."

Bush and Kerry support maintaining U.S. troops in Iraq to provide stability after the transfer of authority to an interim government June 30.

Nader's comments came as White House spokesman Scott McClellan reported that Bush had spoken sharply with newly installed Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, who ordered the withdrawal of the nation's 1,300 troops from Iraq as soon as possible.

"The president urged that the Spanish withdrawal take place in a coordinated manner that does not put at risk other coalition forces in Iraq," said McClellan.

"The president stressed the importance of carefully considering future actions to avoid giving false comfort to terrorists or enemies of freedom in Iraq," McClellan said Bush told Zapatero in a five-minute phone conversation.

Kerry favors an internationalized effort in Iraq, but said on NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday that he supported sending in more U.S. troops, if necessary.

"Now, he's got to out-Bush Bush," said Nader.

The longtime consumer advocate said that the international peacekeeping force he advocated would be drawn from neutral nations and from Islamic countries. Nader said the election process should be carried out at the same time as the six-month withdrawal and done under international supervision.

"The complicated culture of Iraq, the split between Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds makes consensus on a new government a challenge," conceded Nader. "But Iraq should be able to sort out these issues more easily without the military presence of a U.S. occupying force."

Nader, who ran for president as the Green Party nominee in 2000 and 1996, is trying to get on the ballot in 50 states as an independent in 2004.

On the Web:

To read Nader's proposal go to

http://www.votenader.org/

We ought to turn on the full power of our mind-control satellites... that ougta fix 'em.

thank you nader.

you're helping rob the victicrats of an election they're going to solidly lose anyway, which should more than compensate for the overseas military votes that will be blocked or mysteriously "lost" by victicrats.

better get those felons the vote back in florida, liberals...it's your only chance.

I don't believe the people of Iraq trust or would welcome the UN any more than they would NATO. 12 years of UN sactions has embittered them to this august body of very bribeable meat puppets.
Iraq can handle its own country. If we wanted to make peace, we would drop the violence and provide real foreign aid like food medicine and materials for their water, communication, power and transportation repair like we did for Germany or Japan after we smashed them during gulf slaughter one.
If you try to play god you will have the devil to deal with.

The CIA has got to go. They created this at the behest of the ruling class of blood suckers.
Prosecution and prison time is in order to some of its employees...
Where hanging is not warrented.

Sheepdog, is there no bottom to your ignorance? Are you that uninformed or are you playing the jester?

The people of Iraq may very well dislike the UN. But it isn't because of sanctions. It's because they facilitated a corrupt Oil-for-Food program which contibuted not one whit to the welfare of the Iraqi people, but instead strengthened the Ba'athist regime (and many French and Russian companies got massive contracts and huge kickbacks. Strange that these same countries opposed our efforts in Iraq, no? Their willing support for Saddam Hussein is the REAL "Blood for Oil"). The Iraqis also dislike the UN for tirelessly supporting the Ba'athists and opposing any efforts to unseat them- even when the Ba'athists violated UN demands umpteen times.

I must congratulate you on your being the first Leftist to trot out the "sanctions are killing innocent iraqis by the hundreds of thousands" canard since the shooting started. I haven't smelt that pungent slice of crap pie in over a year. Sanctions. What a maroon. Little history lesson for you, sonny:

Iraq invades Kuwait.
Coalition defeats Iraq.
Iraq begs for mercy.
Coalition sets terms.
Iraq agrees to terms.
Iraq violates terms.
Sanctions implemented.

If you'd like, I could come over and smack you in the face with a frozen mackerel between reciting these lines- maybe then it would sink in that IRAQ is responsible for the sanctions.

And could you or any of your fellow travellers kindly provide me a authoritative figure of the number of deaths attributed to sanctions? And could you then substantiate this number? I find it odd that the people who derided sanctions before the conflict haven't been heard from in some time on the subject. And yet they are also quiet about the mass graves filled with hundreds of thousands of executed Iraqis. Fair-weather humanitarians, no doubt.

Now on to the rest of your remarkably uninformed rant:

Are you unaware that the US is building massive infrastructure projects in every city in Iraq? They are doing exactly what you claim to want them to do - Just like they did for Germany and Japan.

But what's with the "drop the violence" reference? Little newsflash for you Sheepdog: Iraq doesn't exist in a vacuum. The United States is attempting to establish the first legitimate Democracy the Arab world has ever known. Fascist, Monarchist, and Theocratic Arab states have a vested interest in seeing this effort fail. They are doing everything in their power to destabilize Iraq - including destroying much of the humanitarian relief projects that you profess to support. How do you suggest we "drop the violence" (love that Californeese-Spicoli speak. Dude, I'm SO not stoked about all the violence man. Late!) when ALL the violence is instigated by our opponents? Kindly elaborate.

Furthermore, your reference to the Marshall Plan is apt. Your support for such a plan will of course be taken as support for our continued administration of the implementation of the plan and the continued presence of our military in Iraq until the plan is complete, correct?

Our rebuilding plan for Japan involved our military running that country for seven years.

Our rebuilding plan for Germany involved our military running that country for eleven years.

So, splitting the difference, we can expect your absolute, wholehearted support for a military occupation and administration of Iraq for nine years, correct?

Good. I'll hold you to it.

We see you, KOBE HQ.

when I wouldn't trust you to wipe your own ass.
Normally I wouldn't respond to a lying sack of dishonorable shit.
With gloves, facemask and long handled tongs I will make an exception this time.

Iraq invades Kuwait.
[this was after April Glaspie ( you know, the ambassador ) said. And I quote
“"We have no opinion on your Arab-Arab conflicts," the transcript reports Glaspie saying, "such as your dispute with Kuwait. Secretary [of State James] Baker has directed me to emphasize the instruction ... that Kuwait is not associated with America."”
http://search.csmonitor.com/durable/1999/05/27/p23s3.htm
Coalition defeats Iraq.
[the best war money could buy]
CAIRO - Washington will go to war against Iraq with a coalition of the willing in the event that it decides to bypass the United Nations. Some are calling it the coalition of the wanting. Others are calling it the coalition of the bribed and the bludgeoned. And now an independent Washington think tank has dubbed it the coalition of the coerced.

Former US secretary of state James Baker has admitted many times on the record that winning support for the first Gulf War in 1991 involved "cajoling, extracting, threatening and occasionally buying votes". This time it's buying and threatening all the way. UN diplomats confirm to Asia Times Online that "regime change is a practically impossible proposition for most countries to accept".
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EC06Ak02.html
.- Back in 1990 when they had the U.N. Security Council vote to authorize the first Gulf War, there was similar bribery and arm twisting. One of the clearest examples was with Yemen. Yemen was the only Arab country on the Security Council at that time. It dared to vote against the U.S. resolution and no sooner had the Yemen ambassador to the U.N. pulled down his hand after having voted no, than a U.S. official came over and told him, "That will be the most expensive "no" vote you have ever cast." Within three days the U.S. aid to Yemen was cut off. It's a country that's very poverty-stricken and really felt that blow. So that stands as an example to a lot of other countries.-
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=51&ItemID=3215

Iraq begs for mercy.
[ I'm fairly certain that the people of Iraq were overjoyed at being bombed into brunt smears because a CIA installed dickhead got too big for his panties. It must give you a lot of joy]

Coalition sets terms.
[bribery and threats go along way, don't they? We ( England, France and ourselves) even added a few that weren't approved, didn't we?
-But French Foreign Minister Hubert Vedrine has called on Washington to redefine its policy on Iraq and criticised the recent US-British airstrikes on Baghdad as having no legal basis in international law.
"We have believed for a long time that there is no basis in international law for this type of bombing," Mr Vedrine has said.
Other countries, notably China and Russia, have condemned the no-fly zones as a violation of Iraqi sovereignty, and they insist there is no backing for the policy under international law or UN resolutions.
The northern no-fly zone was declared after the end of the Gulf War in March 1991 to protect Kurds against military action which had driven huge numbers of people across the borders into Turkey and Iran.
Subsequently, the US, UK and France set up safe havens on the ground in northern Iraq, to which the refugees returned.
In a separate move, Iraqi aircraft were also prohibited from flying over the southern half of the country, in order to hamper President Hussein's operations against the Shi'a population there.
Since UN weapons inspectors withdrew from Iraq shortly before a three-day US-UK bombardment in late 1998 known as Operation Desert Fox, the two Western powers have kept up their attacks whenever Iraqi air defences have locked onto aircraft patrolling the no-fly zones.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/middle_east/newsid_1175000/1175950.stm

Iraq agrees to terms.
[no duh.]
Iraq violates terms.
[I'd shoot at a warcraft flying over my homeland also when they are bombing almost everyday by non UN sanctioned sorties.]
Sanctions implemented.
[ you should be real proud. Through the usual bribe and bully tactic, we denied just about everything this devastated land needed to repair the water and power systems...
-"Sanctions are the economic nuclear bomb."
-- Mairead Maguire, Nobel Peace Laureate, returning from a March 1999 visit to Iraq.

INOC is dedicated to helping the people of Iraq recover from over 12 years of economic sanctions and war, as well as educating the public about the health effects of wars and the unacceptability of bombing civilian infrastructure and economic sanctions. According to UNICEF, sanctions against Iraq contributed to the deaths of half a million children under the age of five-
http://www.scn.org/ccpi/
go just go to hell you lying little tin pot would be ( if you had the stones) murderer. So go ahead and make like a slime covered ell and tell me how I got it wrong. You are disgusting. BTW...
How was the reception by the good people, your friends, on the streets in Kandahar? Or your even better, your fellow solders in the sandbox?]

Sheepdog, you just had your head handed to you by Simon and yet you still continue to blather along posting your inane links straight to cyber nowheresville.

Give it up.

He's categorically correct about everything he posted. Furthermore, you're long winded retort as opposed to your usual pithy one liner illustrates that you know it and are flummoxed.

Stay down dog.

from the women traped in a man's ego.
dogs are better than you.

"dogs are better than you."

Of that I have no doubt. Dog's are next to God as far as I'm concerned. However, the fact still remains that you've been handed your head intellectually ....again.

You are simply nuts.

But alot of fun.

But somehow I don't FEEL like it.
Call me crazy. Oh, that's right you did. I'm hurt, really. I mean it.
No kidding. I'm serious, no lie.

"You are simply nuts.

But alot of fun."

Absolutely. Whoever thought of providing Internet access to mental institutions is a genius. The rest of us get to experience their paranoid ramblings without having to smell the stench of their soiled trousers.

"Dog's are next to God as far as I'm concerned."

In addition to God, what other fairy tales do you believe in?

The Easter Bunny? Santa Claus? The Tooth Fairy?

You'rer nuttier than Rush Limbaugh on an Oxycontin binge!

"what other fairy tales do you believe in?"

Just communism and anarchism.

Well, I happen to believe in the fairy tale that is the government's official explanation of what happened on 9/11/01.