'Maliki said that the United States and Iraq had agreed that all foreign troops would be off Iraqi soil by the end of 2011. "There is an agreement actually reached, reached between the two parties on a fixed date, which is the end of 2011, to end any foreign presence on Iraqi soil," Maliki said.

But the White House disputed Maliki's statement and made clear the two countries are still at odds over the terms of a U.S. withdrawal.

"Any decisions on troops will be based on conditions on the ground in Iraq," White House spokesman Tony Fratto said in Crawford, Tex., where President Bush is vacationing. "That has always been our position. It continues to be our position." Maliki demands 'specifc deadline' for U.S. troop pullout

How presumptious of Maliki. How dare he act as if he were the elected leader of an independent democracy.

Well, he is the Prime Minister of Irak.
He agrees with Obama that 16 months is the right timeframe to get the troops out. He knows our government is changing their chief.

He wants to take advantage of this situation, and show leadership, knowing that most Americans are fade up with this "situation" in Irak and the American people wants their sons back home. I think he is playing his cards the best he can. He is also using this situation to gain strenght and power in the view of his people and the world.

He has a chance of a lifetime and taking it all the way. He knows he can't bully anyone here.

'...Details have not been released, but officials say it would see US combat forces withdrawn from Iraqi towns and cities by the middle of 2009.

The troops would withdraw completely from Iraq by the end of 2011, they add...' US considering Iraq security deal

A fixed timetable for withdrawal? Isn't that really going to put the skids under McCain's election hopes?

(Next they'll be saying they want to move towards normal relations with Iran.)

Drawin' down troops, talkin' to the enemy, etc. I'm tellin' ya, if stuff like this keeps happenin', peace is gonna break out! THEN where will we be? If we're not careful, were gonna put a lot of mercenaries outta work! And is the government gona bail out Halliburton, KBR, and Blackwater? If we don't, who we gonna get to fight our next war, to guard our big shots in the war zone? Where we gonna get our laundry done for only $100 a load?

This peace craze has got to stop before we go under!

'The United States has agreed to a firm deadline for withdrawing combat troops from Iraq that does not set preconditions that must be met, according to a copy of an agreement reached recently and obtained by ABC News.

Despite the concession from the United States, the Iraqi Cabinet announced today it wants to ask for additional changes to the plan...' Iraq Wants Changes to U.S Exit Plan

'The U.S. military has warned Iraq that it will shut down military operations and other vital services throughout the country on Jan. 1 if the Iraqi government doesn't agree to a new agreement on the status of U.S. forces or a renewed United Nations mandate for the American mission in Iraq. U.S. threatens to halt services to Iraq without troop accord

'...the administration is equally invested in the economic aspect: securing US control over Iraqi oil before Bush leaves office, according to experts in the field...

... The large oil companies seek long-term contracts that would give them control over much of Iraq's oil and oil production, according to Juhasz. Although Kurdistan has entered into several contracts with foreign oil companies, Iraqi Oil Minister Hussein Al Shahristani declared that any contract signed before the passage of the oil law is void.

In addition to pushing the international SOFA and Iraq's oil law, the Bush administration is attempting to unilaterally carve a place in US law for a takeover of Iraqi oil, according to Jim Fine, legislative secretary for foreign policy for the Friends Committee on National Legislation. In a signing statement tacked on to the 2009 Defense Authorization Bill, Bush excused himself from a provision intended to rein in US power of Iraq's oil.

The statement - if one accepts it as authoritative - would allow Bush to use defense funds "to exercise United States control of the oil resources of Iraq." Bush wrote that prohibiting such a use of funds "purport(s) to impose requirements that could inhibit the president's ability to carry out his constitutional obligations."..

...The next two months will measure just how far President Bush is willing to go to fulfill the objectives that, many say, underlie his occupation of Iraq. Erik Leaver, Foreign Policy in Focus's policy outreach director, says that the administration's last-ditch efforts - the signing statements, the SOFA, the oil law pressure - demonstrate that Bush has not taken his eye off Iraqi oil.' In Final Days, Bush Pushes for Iraq's Oil

'The Iraqi cabinet has approved a security pact with the US governing the future presence of 150,000 US troops in the country, officials have said.

Under the deal, US troops will withdraw from the streets of Iraqi towns next year, leaving Iraq by the end of 2011.

The decision will need to go before Iraq's parliament for a final vote.' Iraq cabinet backs US troops deal

If McCain were President-Elect now, what would he do about this? What Romney Said About Troop Pullout

'The status of forces of agreement between the United States and Iraq is now called the withdrawal agreement, and that's exactly what it is: an ultimate end to the U.S.-led occupation of Iraq.

If Iraq's parliament endorses the agreement, in six weeks American forces would have to change the way they operate in Iraq, and all U.S. combat troops, police trainers and military advisers would have to leave the country by Dec. 31, 2011. President-elect Barack Obama's campaign plan to leave a residual force of some 30,000 American troops in Iraq would be impossible under the pact.' Under Iraq troop pact, U.S. can't leave any forces behind

Yet it's probable, isn't it, that now and for decades to come there will be those saying it was Obama who "cut and run", "stabbed the troops in the back just when it was all going so well" and so on?

A logistical problem...

'In a nutshell, the Pentagon's argument couldn't be simpler or more red-bloodedly American: We have too much stuff to leave Iraq any time soon. In war, as in peace, we're trapped by our own profligacy. We are the Neiman Marcus and the Wal-Mart of combat. Where we go, our "stuff" goes with us -- in such prodigious quantities that removing it is going to prove more daunting than invading in the first place...' Stuff Happens