Iran

[dspp]

Moderator Message:
Per an alert I have just deleted a post that was at the 'political' end of the spectrum. Until now posts have been focussing in on the facts, and the consequences - both of which are fine for Macro & Global (imho). If folks want to go political then there will be no alternative but to move this thread down to Polite Discussions. Thank you for your understanding & co-operation. regards, dspp

[dspp]

It seems the US doesn't understand that sovereign nations are the sole arbiter of which troops are allowed inside their borders on a lawful basis,

"Washington is not willing to bow to Iraqi demands to withdraw its troops and any future discussions with Baghdad will be purely confined to the future structure of its forces in the country, the US State Department has said.

The recommitment to US troops in Iraq defies an Iraqi parliament vote last week demanding all US forces leave in the wake of the killing of the Iranian general Qassem Suleimani by a drone strike in Baghdad. The US secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, said the US was only willing to discuss force reconfiguration with the Iraqis, and a greater contribution by Nato forces...........

A state department spokesman rejected claims that the US was in discussion with the caretaker Iraqi prime minister, Adel Abdul Mahdi, about the terms of a US withdrawal, saying: “Any US delegation sent to Iraq will be dedicated purely to discussing how to recommit to our strategic partnership, not to discuss troop withdrawal.”"

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... ike-pompeo

The comment elsewhere in the article about the Iraqi parliamentary vote being non-binding is I believe correct, as it is for the Iraqi government to make the determination. However this is not good optics.

regards, dspp