Charity Internet Advertising Personal Loans Mortgages 0 Credit Cards
Google
 
Web IranDefence.net

AP: Rice won't rule out force on Syria, Iran [Archive] - Iran Defense Forum

PDA

View Full Version : AP: Rice won't rule out force on Syria, Iran


digi-democracy
10-19-2005, 01:38 PM
Posted on Wed, Oct. 19, 2005

Rice won't rule out force on Syria, Iran

LIZ SIDOTI

Associated Press


WASHINGTON - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Wednesday refused to rule out U.S. troops still serving in Iraq in 10 years or the possibility that the United States could use military force against neighboring Syria and Iran.

Rice deferred to the decisions of President Bush and military commanders as Republicans and Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee pressed her for more specifics on the U.S. strategy in Iraq.

Asked specifically whether the United States would have troops in Iraq in five or 10 years, Rice said: "I think that even to try and speculate on how many years from now there will be a certain number of American forces is not appropriate."

At the White House, spokesman Scott McClellan also would not rule out the possibility of a U.S. troop presence that far in the future.

"In terms of decisions about troop levels, we've always said that we will look to our commanders on the ground and they will be the ones who will make decisions based on circumstances on the ground," McClellan said.

Lawmakers also pressed Rice on strategy for dealing with Iran and Syria. U.S. officials have accused Syria of allowing foreign fighters to flow across its borders into Iraq and Iran of supporting the insurgency.

Rice said the United States was using diplomatic means to urge a change in the behavior of both countries - but she stopped short of ruling out military force. "I'm not going to get into what the president's options might be," Rice said. "I don't think the president ever takes any of his options off the table concerning anything to do with military force."

Testifying before the committee for the first time since February, Rice sought to reassure jittery lawmakers - who are hearing from their war-weary constituents - that the Bush administration had a plan for success: helping Iraqis clear out insurgents and build durable, national institutions.

She said the United States will follow a model that was successful in Afghanistan. Starting next month, she said, joint diplomatic-military groups - Provincial Reconstruction Teams - will work alongside Iraqis as they train police, set up courts, and help local governments establish essential services.

But even as Rice tried to crystalize the plan, Republicans and Democrats asked her pointed questions they say Americans need to know.

"I'm not looking for a date to get out of Iraq," Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, the top Democrat on the panel, said. "But at what point, assuming the strategy works, do you think we'll be able to see some sign of bringing some American forces home?"

Rice declined to answer directly, choosing to leave an estimate to military commanders. "I don't want to hazard what I think would be a guess, even if it were an assessment, of when that might be possible," Rice said.

Later, Sen. Paul Sarbanes, D-Md., told Rice that her response to questions about U.S. troop withdrawal "leads me to draw the conclusion that you're leaving open the possibility that 10 years from now we will still have military forces in Iraq."

"Senator, I don't know how to speculate about what will happen 10 years from now, but I do believe that we are moving on a course on which Iraqi security forces are rather rapidly able to take care of their own security concerns," Rice responded.

Republican Sens. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island were among several lawmakers who asked Rice whether the Bush administration was considering military action against Iran and Syria, and asked whether the president would circumvent congressional authorization if the White House chose that option.

"I will not say anything that constrains his authority as commander in chief," Rice said.

The lawmakers' queries followed Rice's earlier remark that: "Syria and, indeed, Iran must decide whether they wish to side with the cause of war or with the cause of peace."

As Rice spoke, a woman in the second row of spectators shouted "Stop the killing in Iraq." A police officer motioned her out of the room.

By State Department design, Rice testified before the committee just days after Iraq apparently approved its first constitution since a U.S.-led coalition ousted Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in 2003. Her appearance also coincided with the start of Saddam's trial in Baghdad for a massacre of 150 of his fellow Iraqis.

McClellan praised Saddam's trial as "a symbol that the rule of law is returning to Iraq."

Rice heralded the referendum on the charter as "a landmark" and said the US. strategy was moving from a stage of transition to a stage of preparing a permanent Iraqi government.

She described the administration's plan as "clear areas from insurgent control, to hold them securely, and to build durable, national Iraqi institutions."

"Our strategy is to clear, hold, and build," she said. "The enemy's strategy is to infect, terrorize, and pull down."

Alongside Iraqi allies, she said, the United States is working to dismantle the insurgent network and disrupt foreign support for them, maintain security in areas insurgents no longer hold, and build national institutions to "sustain security forces, bring rule of law, visibly deliver essential services, and offer the Iraqi people hope for a better economic future."

admin
10-19-2005, 02:02 PM
"Syria and, indeed, Iran must decide whether they wish to side with the cause of war or with the cause of peace."


lol, what is that suppose to mean? wasn't America the cause of war lol.

newpersia
10-19-2005, 02:04 PM
Rice got owned in Russia, she will most certainly get owned by China as well. There is no way Russia and China are going to give in unless USA provides some fat amazing economic/military/financial package to them which they simply can't refuse and Iran can't top.

digi-democracy
10-19-2005, 02:22 PM
She never said America did not cause a war. Syria is flaming the violence in western Iraq. The country itself may not have soldiers in Iraq but there not trying to stop foreign militants to cross into Iraq. I have a close friend that has lost 5 of his friends to these folks.

As for Iran I think more needs to be done, by the US and UK to find out if militants are comming from Iran and by whoms orders. If Iran is pro-shia I cant see why they would would to kill the shia's of Iraq.

There is no way Russia and China are going to give in unless USA provides some fat amazing economic/military/financial package to them which they simply can't refuse and Iran can't top.

They didnt vote against the resolution. If they are so pro-Iran they would have voted against it, not abstain.

admin
10-19-2005, 03:03 PM
Russia will most likely veto any action, not too sure about china, they are a funny country, one day they are pro iran having nuclear plants, who knows what will happen the next, same goes for Russia on normal circumstances, but this case is special since they have huge contracts to BUILD the nuclear plants WITH iran.

digi-democracy
10-19-2005, 03:58 PM
True they could veto it. It will be interesting to see what happens next month. I have a feeling it will be pushed back again. Then again. For who know how long.

admin
10-19-2005, 04:08 PM
I don't think it's going to be long till Iran's nuclear plant is active and working. I also don't think Russia would want to lose the contract with Iran. At the end of the day iran WILL have nuclear power plants, why make relations worse than they are!

digi-democracy
10-19-2005, 05:09 PM
"If" the plants would ever be attacked, it would happen before they were complete. Bombing nuclear facilities after the nuclear cycle has been achieved would be very messy. This would only cause many more problems. If negotiations are still going on after they are complete, it will be a moot point.

newpersia
10-19-2005, 05:45 PM
Even now bombing would be messy, i would think there is alot of radioactive material in there right?