On the US-Iraq security deal

Boy, this US Iraq Security pact is turning pear-shaped pretty quickly. As far as I can tell, there's no faction in Iraq that backs this thing as it's being discussed. Maliki is trying to use these discussions to assert control, and, of course, Iran is blocking it.

Maliki's focus appears to be moving US troops off the streets and taking command of when and what military actions are taken.

(Bloomberg) Iraq may balk at renewing some of the rules currently governing U.S. troop operations there in a new security agreement....

(GulfDailyNews) Iraq said yesterday it would not grant US troops freedom of movement for military operations in a new agreement being negotiated on extending the presence of American troops on its soil.

(TimesOnline) American troops in Iraq would be confined to their bases and private security guards subject to local law if Iraq gets its way in negotiations with the US over the future status of American forces.

And the Iraq-Iran politics, Iran is fighting this because they don't want US bases across the border that might be used in an attack.

(AP) Iraqi leader says security deal won't harm Iran.

(AFP) The presence of US forces in Iraq is the country's main problem, Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told visiting Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki on Monday. (AP also.)

So it's no surprise that the Iranian backed Shia groups are a risk, (VOI) A renowned Iraqi Shiite cleric on Sunday warned that a popular uprising may erupt if Iraq signs the long-term agreement with the U.S .

And the Sadr called street protests keep getting bigger.