Iraqi parliament OKs US troops for 3 more years BAGHDAD (AP) - The long, costly story of American military involvement in Iraq moved closer to an end Thursday when Iraq's parliament approved a pact that requires all troops to be out in three years, marking the first clear timetable for a U.S. exit since the 2003 invasion that ousted Saddam Hussein. The vote for the security deal followe...
submitted by
ATangledWeb on 28th Nov 2008 (via atangledweb.squarespace.com)
The American embassy spokesman in Iraq last night said the United States and Iraq have signed an agreement to settle claims of Americans who say they were abused by Saddam Hu
submitted by
Scotsman on 10th Sep 2010 (via news.scotsman.com)
When British troops swept into Iraq they carried with them leaflets bearing an "open letter" in Arabic from Tony Blair. "As soon as Saddam Hussein's regime falls" promised the Prime Minister "the work to build a new free and united Iraq will begin. A peaceful prosperous Iraq which will be run by and for the Iraqi people."
submitted by
Telegraph on 21st Nov 2009 (via telegraph.co.uk)
Here's my latest article on The Australian: THE war in Iraq is officially moving to an end. Six years after Saddam Hussein's regime was toppled, several coalition members have ended their missions in Iraq - including Australia, which pulled out its troops 12 months ago - and the US is preparing to wrap up its military involvement in the country.Many still ask: Was it worth it?If we examine the
submitted by
IraqTheModel on 1st Jun 2009 (via iraqthemodel.blogspot.com)
In Iraq (via DSTFW). On the two-year anniversary of Saddam’s death by hanging, Iraq is preparing to open a new museum that will allow Iraqis to see up close such macabre mementos of mass executions, torture, and other atrocities committed in Saddam’s decades-long rule. Iraq’s High Tribunal, set up after the U.S.-led invasion to try major crimes
submitted by
HarrysPlace on 31st Dec 2008 (via hurryupharry.org)
BRITAIN would not have invaded Iraq in 2003 if it had been clear that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction (WMD), Foreign Secretary David Miliband c
submitted by
Scotsman on 19th Apr 2010 (via news.scotsman.com)
The legality of the continued presence of British troops in Iraq was far from certain last night as the Baghdad parliament delayed a crucial vote on the issue. Iraq's parliament, caught up in a furious but unrelated dispute, will meet in emergency session today when British officials hope that some form of legal cover will be given to British forces in Basra before they leave next summer. How...
submitted by
Guardian on 23rd Dec 2008 (via guardian.co.uk)
Blair and Iraq troopsEarlier this week, Blair announced that a portion of troops were to be moved from Iraq.I suppose this is good news. Still, was it worth going to war initially - There WERE no WMD's. Even though Saddam was a bad man, so what? Foreign policy should only be limited to national defence, not offence. It isn't really our business if Saddam's regime "oppressed" its people.Politicians...
submitted by
LibOnTheUK on 14th Jul 2008 (via chrislib.blogspot.com)
British troops are no longer needed in southern Iraq, according to prime minister Nouri al-Maliki.
submitted by
PoliticsCoUk on 13th Oct 2008 (via politics.co.uk)
British troops will exit Iraq by the middle of next year, Gordon Brown has announced in an unexpected visit to Iraq.
submitted by
PoliticsCoUk on 17th Dec 2008 (via politics.co.uk)
New details have emerged about Saddam Hussein, the former Iraqi president, after the FBI released secret interview notes taken while he was in US custody. According to the FBI, Saddam misled the world into believing Iraq had weapons of mass destruction because he considered Iran - not the US - as the biggest security threat to his country. Al Jazeera's Rob Reynolds reports.
submitted by
Ordovicius on 3rd Jul 2009 (via simondyda.net)