.
June 9th, 2008
05:04 PM ET

Should Bush negotiate long-term deal with Iraq?

ALT TEXT
An Iraqi army soldier stands guard at a checkpoint in the Shiite district of Sadr City in Baghdad, Iraq.(PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Now is not the time for President Bush to negotiate a long-term security agreement with Iraq – that's the message from lawmakers in both Iraq and in the U.S.

More than 30 Iraqi lawmakers who represent parties making up a majority in the Iraqi parliament sent a letter to Congress last week. They said they will reject any agreement that "is not linked to clear mechanisms" obligating U.S. troops to leave "with a declared timetable and without leaving behind any military bases, soldiers or hired fighters."

The Associated Press reports that Iraqi officials familiar with the negotiations warn that a deal is unlikely to be reached before President Bush leaves office unless the administration lets up on some of its demands that Iraqis see as giving U.S. troops way too much freedom and stepping on Iraq's sovereignty.

Here at home, both Democratic and Republican lawmakers are accusing President Bush of trying to tie the hands of the next president when it comes to Iraq. The four senior members of the Senate Foreign Relations committee sent a letter saying the administration hasn't consulted with them on this agreement and that the need for legislative approval "remains an open question."

For its part, the administration insists that this agreement is not a treaty and so it doesn't need to be approved by the Senate. More of the same from George Bush. Do whatever you want whether the people think it's a good idea or not. Officials say the deal won't commit U-S troops to staying in Iraq, won't create permanent bases, and won't pledge to protect Iraq if invaded. Here's the problem: the U.N. mandate that authorizes U.S. presence in Iraq expires in December.

Here’s my question to you: Should President Bush be negotiating a long-term security agreement with Iraq?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Jerry from Tulsa, Oklahoma writes:
President Bush will try to do an end run around Congress and make a long-term deal with Iraq, but his 32% approval rating will tackle him for a loss.

Jeff from Galena, Missouri writes:
He can negotiate anything he wants to. Whatever it is, it should be mandatory that it passes Congress.

Bob from Virginia writes:
I think Bush should start negotiating his way out of impeachment trials.

Loren writes:
No. He has single-handedly done enough damage in the Middle East and to the long-term interests of our country. Early in his administration, Bush should have adopted the Hippocratic oath, “first, do no harm." It is far too late for that now.

Marie writes:
It would just be a parting gift to allow McCain an excuse not to correct America's involvement in Iraq. Hopefully Obama will be wise enough to dissolve any such agreements, despite the howling from Republican chickenhawks. I think the other 80% of the U.S. would support him.

Pete writes:
The only thing Bush should be doing is asking for forgiveness from the American people and the rest of the world. The best we can hope for is that he will do nothing for the rest of his term.

Joseph writes:
Absolutely not, as there is no reason to tie the hands of the next administration in this obvious attempt to dictate future policy. Oh, wait. Maybe that's the idea.


Filed under: Iraq
soundoff (116 Responses)
  1. milly in massachusetts

    No he has done enough and anything else will just add to his enormous mistake. We don't need to be tied to Iraq for years to come. The situation has already taken it's toll on our economy.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:10 pm |
  2. Judith from Rochester, NY

    Only if he plans to saddle the next president with his own failures. It's bad enough that someone else has to resolve Bush's war. Such a move would seem to conjure up up the image of a Bush temper-tantrum insisting till that he was and is right. The next president should not be hobbled by actions wrought of Bush's hubris.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:12 pm |
  3. jaffer

    He should only do so with help of U.N.let other nations provider troops too for that long term security agreement.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:13 pm |
  4. Jed in Redding, CA

    Absolutely the hell not - but he will anyway. He's knows there's at least a 50% chance Barack Obama will be the next President and he's going to do as much as he can to tie his hands as much as possible.

    Let's face facts - this move is politically motivated. A long term agreement would make Iraq a moot point in the election. Bush and his advisers know that if there's already a binding 5-10-15 year agreement, it won't matter who the next Presdient is when it comes to our role in Iraq. 100 years is looking more likely every day.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:15 pm |
  5. lou from Iowa

    Bush has screwed things up enough. He should take a long vacation and leave the negotiations to the next guy.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:23 pm |
  6. David, Orlando, FL

    He is trying to make permanent his disastrous policies. Read: sign permanent contracts for Haliburton, Blackwater et. Al., that would be impossible to get out of. To allow this would be just as dumb as voting for him twice.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:23 pm |
  7. Mark, Oklahoma City

    Yes, he should. He should send them a telegram saying that he is no longer going to "restrain" Israel from blowing them off the face of the earth. If that doesn't get through their thick skulls, then the Iranians deserve whatever happens to them.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:25 pm |
  8. David,San Bernardino,CA.

    Bush has no business negotiating anything with Iraq except a complete withdrawal. The best thing bush can do is go back to Crawford on a permanent vacation.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:26 pm |
  9. Nuwan Sam

    No unless he wants to damage his legacy.

    Nuwan from Houston, TX

    June 9, 2008 at 2:26 pm |
  10. sarah, Indiana

    bush should shut up and sit down.... he's done enough damage already!

    June 9, 2008 at 2:26 pm |
  11. Rosalynd Florida

    Absolutely not! The American people want out of Iraq and any attempts to broker deals keep us there so Bush and his boys can have their militray bases is criminal. I sure hope their are laws on the books to allow the next president to break any deals Bush try to cut on his way out of office.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:26 pm |
  12. Ed Reed

    No, that should be left to the next President and the Congress. Given his track record, President Bush should not be allowed to touch anything while he remains in office. His is the exact opposite of the "Midas Touch."

    Ed Reed
    Port Aransas, TX

    June 9, 2008 at 2:26 pm |
  13. Darlene - Philadelphia

    Ah, heck no!

    June 9, 2008 at 2:27 pm |
  14. Tina (Ft Worth)

    No. We need to pack up and go. Iraq is meeting with Iran now and making a deal and we are so stupid to think that Iraq still wants us. Wrong. They don't know and never did but we know best.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:28 pm |
  15. Russ, Seattle

    Personally I would prefer any far reaching agreements be made by the incoming administration. Bush's legacy is too damaging already.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:29 pm |
  16. Larry from Georgetown, Tx

    No, he should bring all of our troops home before he leaves office and let the Iraqi's have their civil war and divide up into 3 or 4 countries or states, just like we had to have our own civil war.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:30 pm |
  17. Gigi in Alabama

    I would not trust George Bush to negoiate anything with Howdy Doody much less Iraq. We've already put the village idiot in charge of too much already. Let's just put him to pasture in Crawford and then try to forget that for almost eight years he has turned us into a laughing stock across the entire planet.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:32 pm |
  18. Dan, Chantilly Va

    Sure. We'll trade them a small security detail on a 5-year contract for oil money, a second round pick, and a player to be named later.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:32 pm |
  19. Conor in Chicago

    I think the congress should threaten to issue articles of impeachment if he continues with this policy: It is the only thing will stop him.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:34 pm |
  20. Larry McCumber

    Yes he should Jack. If he plays his cards right he could be crowned King George and they could build a statue of him and everybody would live happily ever after.

    Larry in Florida

    June 9, 2008 at 2:36 pm |
  21. Terry from North Carolina

    Jack
    The best thing George can do is go out to Crawford Texas and relax till Jan. 20th 2009. I am sure the people of Iraq will be relieved. I know I will be.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:36 pm |
  22. Jayne in NH

    Absolutely, positively not!!! The fact he believes he can enter into an arrangement like this without Congressional approval is outrageous. They should start the impeachment hearing today.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:38 pm |
  23. Annie, Atlanta

    Bush should not be allowed to make any deals or touch anything at all on behalf of the American people. All he needs to do is keep on dancing for the cameras. That way he can't destroy whatever is left.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:39 pm |
  24. Staci from Nashville, Tn

    Bush shouldn't do anything else to help. He is just a accident waiting to happen, and a major mess up.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:39 pm |
  25. Dave from Arlington, MA

    President Bush should leave that to the next president. No matter which candidate is chosen, we can rest assured that he will be wiser than Bush.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:40 pm |
  26. Warren, Detroit

    For sure he should. Write a contract, set a price, get it signed. This time we mean business not "business".

    June 9, 2008 at 2:40 pm |
  27. Bob Fleming

    Any long term security agreement with Iraq must be arrived at with the approval of the legislative bodies of both the United States and Iraq.

    It is the opinion of a large majority of the legislative bodies of both countries that an agreement arrived at without such approval would be in violation of the Constitutions of both countries and would be meaningless.

    The only people in government in favor of a long term U.S. presence in Iraq are Bush, McCain and their minions in Washington and Baghdad.

    Bob
    Louisville, Ky

    June 9, 2008 at 2:42 pm |
  28. Diane Glasser

    For goodness sake No. He does not know the first thing about negotiating and nothing about security. Remember he could not even react when he was first told that we had been attacked on 9/11.
    Does he even know what kind of security negotiation he wants, and what Bush gang member is supposedly advising him on this?

    June 9, 2008 at 2:43 pm |
  29. Howard M, Bolingbrook IL

    No, Bush should not and has been requested by the congress, that he not make any deals with the Iraqi that would commit this country to any obligations to them. Most of the Iraqi people and government have said just recently, they don't want us there. This was "Bush's War" of choice, after he leaves the office I hope, he is brought up on some form charges.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:43 pm |
  30. Tom, Avon, Maine, The Heart of Democracy

    Let's see, Jack. He negotiated the no bid contracts that transfered America's wealth to Halliburton which is now headquartered in the Middle-east. He negotiated the lethal emergency housing trailers for the Katrina victims. He has charmed the socks off of Putin in his negotiations (Putin hasn't poisoned him yet) And he negotiated with the Saudis for more oil production. How did that go?

    I don't think he can negotiate a K turn.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:44 pm |
  31. Jan Davis, Knoxville, TN

    Absolutely not. Remember he is a lame duck President in every sense of the word and shouldn't tie the United States to a deal when it is so close to his departure time from the White House. He's made a big mess of things in Iraq and many thousands have been killed or wounded due to his warmongering!

    June 9, 2008 at 2:45 pm |
  32. Terry in Hanover County

    He's done enough damage. Besides, when will he have time to negotiate anything? Isn't he too busy making a list of cronies, accomplices, and fellow criminals to pardon before he leaves office?

    June 9, 2008 at 2:45 pm |
  33. Cynthia

    What President Bush should do is just leave on the decision to be made to the next President (Obama). He will be leaving a huge mess that will probably take another 8 years to clear up. So, he should just do nothing other than past another stimulus package that Senator Obama spoke of , and then just gitty gitty on back to Texas.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:46 pm |
  34. R.W Graytown Ohio

    I ask myself, what could he possibly screw up in his remaining time. And then I'm scared, of what he could possibly screw up in his remaining time.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:46 pm |
  35. Bill,Quarryville. PA

    Not if he cares anything about our country and the people who are struggling every day to keep their heads above water. The billions of dollars that it would cost the taxpayers of this country for a long-term security package for Iraq, should be spent to help get our own house in order and secure our own borders.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:46 pm |
  36. Dave from Veazie, ME

    Jack,

    No! He's the one that caused the whole mess in the first place. Had he and his cronies handled the war correctly from the beginning it probably would have gone as they led the nation to believe it would, but that would have meant fewer no-bid contracts for Haliburton. Bush should do what he's done for most of his presidency, take a vacation.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:47 pm |
  37. Anne/Seattle

    He's spent eight years making a mess of every aspect of American life through bad choices, stupidity and an outsized ego. If he negotiates a long term deal with Iraq he will not only place a terrible burden on the next president, he will continue to have the same negative impact on all Americans. It would behoove the Republicans to work behind the scenes to leash in their errant leader before he can take another stab at destroying us.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:47 pm |
  38. Cynthia

    Correction:

    What President Bush should do is just leave all of the decisions to be made to the next President (Obama). He will be leaving a huge mess that will probably take another 8 years to clear up. So, he should just do nothing other than pass another stimular package that Senator Obama spoke of, and then just gitty up, gitty up on back to Texas.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:48 pm |
  39. Raz

    Folks this is much worse than is being reported , even by CNN , Bush Co is leveraging both sides against the middle in Iraq to get his way and its working . Against their better judgements the Iraqis are going to sign this pact with the devil ( Bush ) He wants 50 permanent military bases control of all Iraqi airspace below 29,000 feet, immunity for all American soldiers and contractors , powers of arrest pertaining to Iraqi civilians and the worst is hes making Iraqi soil homebase for the war on terror , were in the hell is CNN this story needs to be screamed from the rooftops , Cafferty ?

    June 9, 2008 at 2:48 pm |
  40. Ron San Diego

    Hi Jack:

    I think the Persident should woory about the condition of this country. And stop all of the drama. He theatrics are not working. I think he should start planning for retirement. That way he can't do any more damage.

    Ron K. San Diego

    June 9, 2008 at 2:49 pm |
  41. DON SCHOLTES

    Govenor Bush and i use that term because it was his last elected office.He should not be allowed to negotiate anything.We must help keep him safe from himself.If it werent for bad ideas he would have none

    June 9, 2008 at 2:49 pm |
  42. Marguerite Toledo, OH

    Bush shouldn't be allowed to say another word. All the lies he spewed out of his mouth. His mouth is what got us into this mess in Iraq. They should make him wear a muzzle for the rest of his term. No one in his administration should be allowed to speak on the behalf of the United States, unless they are talking impeachment!

    That's just my opinion.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:50 pm |
  43. Dick B

    I think this a rebound thing. The Bush-Saudi connection seems to be playing out. This is an attempt by G.W. to give the Bush clan a new bunch of rich oil guys to hold hands and kiss.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:50 pm |
  44. raul from louisville kentucky

    he knows better. ....... or maybe not.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:50 pm |
  45. Dave, Brooklyn, NY

    Is there any way we can get him to go back to Crawford and stay there for the rest of his term? The next guy will have his hands full enough. We don’t need Bush doing any more “presidenting” until 2009. His very next presidential duty should be to hand the keys to the next fool.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:51 pm |
  46. Greg ...Cabot AR

    Bush is either so delusional that he still thinks his open ended war without direction will succeed and he wants to get the credit....OR.. he is trying to set up Obama with an unworkable agreement that is designed to fail.

    He hasn't a clue how to win the war and is trying to hedge his legacy to take credit if Obama succeeds or lay blame if it fails.

    Bush uses the situation in Iraq the same way he used the tragedy of 9/11.....all for for political gain.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:51 pm |
  47. Connie from Logansport,IN

    Jack, Some one needs to put Bush in that bunker under the white house and not let him out until Jan 09 when it is time to return the village idiot to Texas. Of course I am sure McBush will like this it will take the heat off of him. OBAMA 08

    Connie

    June 9, 2008 at 2:51 pm |
  48. Kristen- Philadelphia, PA

    Bush should negotiate absolutely nothing. He should be a good little President and sit still until his replacement arrives. He has caused this country and Iraq more than enough problems. No need in creating more.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:52 pm |
  49. Mark, Berwyn, PA

    He can try but in my opinion, whatever deal he negotiates will not be worth the paper it's written on. That country, and the fools who run it, cannot be trusted. For that matter, the flimsy democracy we've installed cannot be trusted to last until the end of this decade. I say, write it off and get the heck out of there pronto. Cut your losses. Stop throwing good money after bad. Whatever cliche you want to use, use it and stop funding Iraq with our tax dollars!! Just one man's opinion.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:52 pm |
  50. Carmen

    NO, he has done enough damage. Of course we can not be sure of what he will and has done, the only thing is for sure that this administration has lied, lied and broken the law. He (Bush) is not concern because he and his buddies have made a lot of money and he and his have nothing to worry about but I am a firm believer that the wrong you do or right will come back to you.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:55 pm |
  51. Jack Seminole, FL

    Jack,

    It does not matter. The Iraqi Parliament has said that any agreement between Bush and the head of the Iraq government that is not ratified by the Iraq Parliament is illegal and not binding. They also said any agreement must have a plan of withdrawal of American forces in a specific timeline before Parliament will approve it.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:56 pm |
  52. Kathy G, Glendale Heights, IL

    I wouldn't trust Bush to negotiate delivering a pizza from one corner of the Oval Office to the other.

    The LAST thing I want is for that criminal to open his mouth to anyone while purporting to be speaking on behalf of the American people. He has done quite enough damage already, thanks.

    June 9, 2008 at 2:56 pm |
  53. Jay, Denver CO

    No, he needs to take his remaining time and invade all of the other countries that he is capable of spelling... Iran, Siria, err Ciria, err... ok he'll just invade Iran!

    June 9, 2008 at 2:59 pm |
  54. Michael Lorton, Virginia

    Jack: Let's evaluate; we have established US military bases in Iraq; we are rebuilding and constructing the damage that we have inflicted; we are supplying weapons and humanitary aid to the Iraq people; and we are building a 600 million embassy. Those are not short term investments. Old saying, in for a penny, in for a pound. We are already committed for the long term.....whether the Bush administration admits it or not. The newly elected president wil have to determine how to "uncomit."

    June 9, 2008 at 2:59 pm |
  55. Rolando DePuy

    Mr. Bush should do nothing. Everything he does is a bad decition. Just get out of our White House

    June 9, 2008 at 2:59 pm |
  56. Adam Mercer Oshawa, Ontario

    Um....sure...it should look like this...

    "We the United States of America are going to get the hell out of here so you can fight your civil war without us. While we are away we are going to send our troops to Afghanistan to get the guy we are really mad at. When we are done there we might come back here to help you rebuild after you are done killing each other."

    June 9, 2008 at 3:02 pm |
  57. Josh (Waipahu, Hawaii)

    Absolutely not. He should not saddle his failed policies onto the future president any more than he already has.

    June 9, 2008 at 3:03 pm |
  58. WW

    No way. He has done more than enough harm to the USA and the World.

    June 9, 2008 at 3:03 pm |
  59. Ray, Florida

    Bush negotiating?
    Hmmm!
    How's that been working out for us?
    Question answered!

    June 9, 2008 at 3:04 pm |
  60. Craig

    Jack, He hasant done anything else right, perhaps we should forego any further "diplomatic" inititaves till after the election.

    June 9, 2008 at 3:04 pm |
  61. BOB, VA

    I think Bush should start negotiating his way out of IMPEACHMENT TRIALS !!!!!!

    June 9, 2008 at 3:06 pm |
  62. Herman in LA

    Yes on how we should Impeach him...

    June 9, 2008 at 3:11 pm |
  63. sarah, Indiana

    wait is bush still president?

    June 9, 2008 at 3:12 pm |
  64. C. Farrell, Houston, Tx

    Bush used poor judgement by rushing to war with Iraq and it would be poor judgement for him to negotiate any agreements with Iraq.

    June 9, 2008 at 3:13 pm |
  65. Alan, Buxton, Maine

    You could not have conceived of a more frightening idea if you had tried. The thought of a dysfunctional moron like Bush negotiating anything with anyone is absurd. His IQ is in the negative range and his understanding of anything is even lower. This country may not be able to withstand six more months of his atrocities.

    June 9, 2008 at 3:13 pm |
  66. Jerry -Roselle, Illinois

    "Negotiate"-No I don't think so, not unless he has learned
    how to pronounce the word " Nuclear". Duh!

    June 9, 2008 at 3:15 pm |
  67. Patricia

    If I were Iraq I wouldn't jump into any deals with George Bush.
    1. A President Obama would negotiate a better deal which will include no U.S. troops in Iraq.
    2. A President Obama will not allow us to get sucked into a confrontation with Iran unless it attacks Israel.

    June 9, 2008 at 3:17 pm |
  68. Richard B, East TN

    Jack,

    OF COURSE he should negotiate a security agreement AND just as soon as possible -
    As this fits into J. McCain's (the presumtive president in 2009?) Iraq policy as well as a supporter of Bush's Iraq policies, he (Sen. McCain) should be head of the negotiaion delegation - That way the Republicans and the future President McCain won't have to fool with that nasty little truth as an election issue (it will be all ready settled) -

    Only suggestion that I would have is that we have a monitary limit of how much we will spend there (say $8 Billion per month [a couple B less than now]) and maybe, say only 100 American lives per month (give or take of course)

    Hey – just another reason I think Hillery Clinton supporters need to vote for McCain in November

    June 9, 2008 at 3:17 pm |
  69. Billy G in Las Vegas

    only if he wants post Vietnam style egg on his face after he leaves office.

    June 9, 2008 at 3:18 pm |
  70. Colleen, Weddington, North Carolina

    H_ LL NO! I don't want him negotiating anything let alone a long term agreement with Iraq. Can't we just send him on an extended vacation until Barrack can take over?

    June 9, 2008 at 3:18 pm |
  71. Ron Christman

    Jack,

    Neither Bush nor Cheney should be making any deals between now and January 20th. It’s too late to impeach them but couldn’t we put an ankle bracelet on them to keep them from leaving the White House. An alarm should go off every time they venture away from the Rose Garden or pick up the red phone.

    Ron
    Washington, PA

    June 9, 2008 at 3:20 pm |
  72. Cliff D, VA.

    Based on some of the comments you have received and if whoever becomes the next President agrees with most of the comments you have received, maybe the current President should at least develop a framework for an agreement.

    June 9, 2008 at 4:09 pm |
  73. Don in Florida

    If Bush can negotiate anything to help end the war and stop our troops from dying by Iranian made/supplied weapons then i'm all for it. I just hope he doesnt try to do something short term for political reasons just to help his good buddy McCain.

    June 9, 2008 at 4:10 pm |
  74. Russ in PA

    Impeach the clown... Impeach him, impeach him, impeach him...

    Not clear enough?Impeach him!

    June 9, 2008 at 4:14 pm |
  75. Audrey West Pt. GA

    Bush should not do anything but find a comfortable rocking chair and relax for the duration of his term in office. He has truly done enough., see the mess this country is in.. Enough is enough!

    June 9, 2008 at 4:28 pm |
  76. gary lee, from san luis obispo, ca.

    it has been said that an Iraqi official resently said to a U.S. army officer, "why should we spend our money to fix our economy, when america is willing to spend theirs".
    if that statement is true then, HELL NO! we need to get out!
    iraq is getting rich and the U.S. is going broke!

    June 9, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  77. Anna, SW Missouri

    I listened to men from Iraq testifying on C-SPAN last night and they do NOT want us to have bases in Iraq and do want a timed withdrawal within the next one to two years. They do not want the 1500 people at the largest embasey in the world. It doesn't matter that we don't want to be there, they don't want us there.

    June 9, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  78. Kerry

    An intellgient leader of the free world would have always been open to at least communication with a country like Iran..Especially Bush & friends after we invaded Irag and left the middle east open for Iran...

    Where would this world be if the leaders didn't talk to each they didn't agree with?

    It would be an empty desolated shell of a planet after everyone set off their nukes who had them...Thank God Reagan talked to Russia...

    June 9, 2008 at 4:44 pm |
  79. Matt

    Seems to me the next President's hands are already tied regardless of what they might say- they have to deal with Iraq. If President Bush doesnt make some sort of negotiated deal with Iraq and the UN forces a US witdrawal, we have nothing to worry about. I'm sure Iran is more than willing to help pick up the pieces...

    June 9, 2008 at 4:45 pm |
  80. Kathy/Marietta, GA

    Please Jack. Enough of Bush and his twin Mccain. The only thing that Bush should negotiate is bypassing the general election and letting Obama enter the white house July 1, 2008.

    June 9, 2008 at 4:48 pm |
  81. Tom Huntington,NY

    With only seven months and thirteen days to go until Dubaya is out of the White House he shouldn't be doing anything. He's already done more than enough damage to both countries.

    June 9, 2008 at 4:51 pm |
  82. Pam M - London, Ontario Canada

    Jack, don't you think he has made enough of a mess for the next President to deal with? Hop-a- long George should just get on his horse and ride away, and be thankful that he wasn't impeached or worse.

    June 9, 2008 at 4:51 pm |
  83. Nicole A from Florida

    Jack

    My heart breaks at the very thought of Bush doing anything. He should not commit us to a long term deal of anykind. Bush has taken of this Country long enough. I am so tired ...Why won't someone do something. He has used all of us , he has siphoned wealth from us to make his Haliburtin and Blackwater friends rich....He cares nothing for the people of the United States....Congress should suspend his rights IMPEACH him and make him answer for all his crimes....

    June 9, 2008 at 4:54 pm |
  84. Jenny from Nanuet, New York

    The only thing he should be negotiating is the amount of time he has to spend in prison for war crimes.

    June 9, 2008 at 4:55 pm |
  85. Darren S.

    Their negotiating the lawlessness we bring htere. If al-Maliki were a real leader, he'd never allow an occupying force to call the shots in their soverign nation.

    June 9, 2008 at 4:56 pm |
  86. Lynn - Rancho Mirage, California

    Bush needs to "forgetaboutit" when it comes to making deals with ANY country – hasn't he messed up enough?

    June 9, 2008 at 5:01 pm |
  87. Karen J. from Rocklin, Ca

    Let me get this straight. We went into Iraq for WMDs,suppose to be there maybe 2 months and leave. Instead we have over 4,000 American deaths and climbing.,we're entering our sixth year of occupation, it's taken a toll on the economy and now he wants to negotiate a long-term security agreement. God help us.

    June 9, 2008 at 5:05 pm |
  88. mick, Hamden, CT

    You don't think it is such a farce to talk about "negotiations with Iraq"? Who is "Iraq" these days? Was there a government in place when we invaded? No. These are hand-picked puppets of our country. I would love to know what the Iraqi people think of "their government" but we'll never see that kind of reporting. It's easier to just forward White House press releases than actually investigate.

    June 9, 2008 at 5:07 pm |
  89. Tom Schoenberger

    Dear Jack,
    The only thing Bush should negotiate is forgiveness from God and the American people for the mess he's made of this country.

    June 9, 2008 at 6:21 pm |
  90. l William L. Boyan

    Bush should not try to enter a long term deal with the Iraqi government to keep Amercican forces in Iraq. The next president and Congress are going to be Democratic. Bush is now the commander-in-chief of the armed forces. When Obama is sworn in, he is going to show the world how ready he is to be commander-in-chief. He is going to start ordering troops out.

    Congress has voted money to "support the troops" only because Bush ordered them to stay in Iraq, and Congress didn't want them to be there without support. But when Obama orders them out, Congress will stop appropriating money for troops to be there.

    Vox populi, vox dei.

    June 9, 2008 at 6:21 pm |
  91. Geoff, Southington, CT

    Jack,
    The Bush Administration does not surprise me with this action, claiming that the senate is not needed to approve this deal. The last 8 years of this administration have been grounded in "executive privilege" and side-stepping the many procedures upon which our government relies to ensure prevention of abusing power. With regard to Iraq, negotiating a long term security deal does not solve the many issues Iraq faces such as how to achieve national and political reconciliation and rebuild the economic and societal infrastructure of the country. The Bush Administration has caused severe damage to the delicate political balance that existed in the Middle East before March of 2003 and they now plan to leave the next president with the catastrophe they created in Iraq.

    June 9, 2008 at 6:22 pm |
  92. Sandro

    Off course not ! Everbody in this administration must be a fool or just plain dumb .Everthing they do is hurting this country .Instead of waisting US wealth overseas,they should be helping this country get back on its feet.They should be investing money on a technologic revolution ,creating new jobs and reestabilishing the strenght of the Dollar.Even my grandma can do a better job then those two and she is 102 years old (wanna talk about experience ?) .

    June 9, 2008 at 6:22 pm |
  93. Rachelle

    No, President Bush should not be signing anything at this point. He is simply trying to sign all our lives away to his policies. He is on his way out and thinks humm, great time to make my policies permanent.

    I think this is sickening. He should not be allowed to sign one more document without the approval of Congress. He is just going to make a much bigger mess for the next President to deal with.

    June 9, 2008 at 6:22 pm |
  94. Kevin from Encinitas

    This clown has proven time and again that he has neither the judgement nor the intelligence to negotiate anything. The best thing Bush could do for this country and the planet is to take an eight month vacation.

    June 9, 2008 at 6:22 pm |
  95. matt

    i am hardcore bush fan i think we should keep our troops there and kill everything and steal the oil

    June 9, 2008 at 6:23 pm |
  96. Tom from Long Island

    Love the segment...

    I am one of those who backed Bush, fought with all those who said the war was not necessary...

    I have been betrayed... we all have been betrayed... Lets start Talking Jail Time For Bush, Chaney and Rove.

    When, Wexler gets Rove in front of him ... and Rove takes the 5th, Lets water board him... till he tells the truth...after all its National Security Issue...

    Im Now a Libertarian – give the party some time...

    Pissed off on Long Island

    June 9, 2008 at 6:23 pm |
  97. Jefff

    Hasn't he done enough harm, and hasn't the rest of the world laughed at us enough? If he's lining up final trips to rack up frequent flier miles, I will donate mine for the sake and safety of all Americans.

    June 9, 2008 at 6:24 pm |
  98. Ed from Twin Bridges Montana

    Are you kidding me? With his record I wouldn't let him negotiate rules for school crossings security. He'd bankrupt the school by outsourcing the crossing guard support to Halliburton, get thousands of kids and guards killed before they got supplied with crossing guard flags, and 5 years later the kids still wouldn't be able to safely cross the street.

    June 9, 2008 at 6:25 pm |
  99. Bruce Kimball

    Bruce K. from Pine Plains, New York:
    This must be a trick question since the answer is so obvious.
    Americans are opposed to this agreement. Iraqis are opposed to it.
    The only one who thinks it would be a good idea is G.W. and we
    know what his record is like. When it comes to making bad decisions,
    he's batting 1000.

    June 9, 2008 at 6:29 pm |
  100. Tom from Long Island

    He shouldn Touch anything else....!!

    Just fade away into his orange jump suit... and cozy cell!

    June 9, 2008 at 6:29 pm |
  101. Tony Vosburgh

    GW couldn't make a decision about Katrina, the war in Irag and the economy. There is no way he should be negotiating about long term security in Irag. Our leaders in the house and senate should be negotiating this policy and they should be put on notice they'll be held accountable with the upcoming election if they start playing politics.

    June 9, 2008 at 6:29 pm |
  102. Howard P.

    Jack – as always you're spot-on with the Bush non-thinking-tank doing what they do best – not thinking; not considering; not consulting; not LISTENING. It's been proven time and again that our military presence in Iraq has done nothing more than fan the flames (and rightfully so) of a people who want only to be enjoying sovereignty; not imperialism. It's always been his highness' agenda to let this horror show fall to the next elected (and hopefully responsibly thinking) President. No negotiations are required or necessary – Let's just get the hell out of there as responsibly as possible (can someone listen to Sen. Biden please ???).

    June 9, 2008 at 6:29 pm |
  103. Raul

    This Congress, from the beginning, has been allowing this President to do what he wants.

    Democrats have taken the majority in Congress, but have still been a non issue as it relates to Changing the Occupation of Iraq.

    This President, regardless of how he wants to "Word" this treaty, is still a committment from the United States to provide what ever is stipulated and our Congress has to Require and Mandate that any agreement has to be voted on by this Congress.

    By the grace of God, why haven't we Impeached this man. I know we want to save the Office of the Presidency the embarassment, but I think the bigger embarrasment will be when History looks back at us and asks... "Why did they leave this man in Office"?

    Presidency = Bush = Energy = Enron.

    June 9, 2008 at 6:30 pm |
  104. Janet Ross

    Should Bush negotiate a deal with Iraq? After he negotiated a deal with India acquiring mangos for the USA, and nuclear intelligence for India, I don't think so!

    JR

    June 9, 2008 at 6:31 pm |
  105. A Kraft Naples, FL

    he cannot negotiate his way out of a paper bag...negotiating with Iran...lol...they know Obama will at least talk to them as BUsh would not

    June 9, 2008 at 6:31 pm |
  106. LaLa, Lakewood WA

    I think he has done enough damage....I think he should leave it to the future President.

    June 9, 2008 at 6:31 pm |
  107. Ted Stoops

    Absolutely not!! The only sensible thing to do in Iraq is pack up and leave. Like it or not, Iran has the upper hand in the current state of affairs in Iraq, thanks to Bush.

    US citizen living in the Philippines.

    June 9, 2008 at 6:32 pm |
  108. Wendell

    Jack, if you are asking if I think that Bush should be allowed to trash the White House on his way out and leave the new Prez to clean it up? Well, I say, "No You Can't"! The incredulous behavior of the Bush administration seems to know no end. I actually feel sorry for the incoming President because it's gonna take at least a 4 year "tow truck" operation to pull America out of the ditch that Bush drove us in!

    Wendell

    Durham, NC

    June 9, 2008 at 6:33 pm |
  109. Rob Crawford

    Listen Jack, George bush has been treating his terms in office as though this is a monarchy in which he is the King, Bush has consistantly ignored the will of the people and has imposed his own. I say lets dethrone this tyrant and feed him to the lions. I'm hearing calls for impeachment in the air.

    Rob Crawford
    Yucaipa, Calif.

    June 9, 2008 at 6:34 pm |
  110. Mike M

    It's funny to think that after all of his term in office that he has finally started listening to what the American people have to say. No, he should not be negotiating anything more than which pair of underpants has more stripes. This is nothing more than a ploy to boost his approval rating so he can say that he wasn't so bad after all.

    June 9, 2008 at 6:42 pm |
  111. Pugas-Az

    He should be negotiating a short term withdwral from Iraq

    June 9, 2008 at 6:43 pm |
  112. John from Ventura

    Absolutely not!!! How very like this very small, limited man to try and tie the hands of his successor. The American people and the Iraqis deserve far better than any more damage inflicted by Bush.

    June 9, 2008 at 6:43 pm |
  113. Steven

    Let the negotiations run their course. We should not try to judge what Pres. Bush is trying to do for the next administration. Rather lets fucus on winning the war.

    June 9, 2008 at 6:44 pm |
  114. Jack

    I'm with Long Island Tom. Let'em all see the inside of a jail looking out.
    Tom, I wasn't with you at the start. I knew he was wrong all along.

    June 9, 2008 at 6:44 pm |
  115. Phil

    Any "arrangement" that is not a treaty, would not not in law bind the U.S. to anything. It would be no more than a handshake agreement with a lame duck president. Why would the Iraqis make any concessions on such a basis?

    June 9, 2008 at 6:44 pm |
  116. baatin los angeles, CA

    Mark, Oklahoma City June 9th, 2008 2:25 pm ET

    Yes, he should. He should send them a telegram saying that he is no longer going to “restrain” Israel from blowing them off the face of the earth. If that doesn’t get through their thick skulls, then the Iranians deserve whatever happens to them.

    mark, you fool, iraq and iran are not the same thing.

    June 9, 2008 at 6:44 pm |