US Puppet Govt. in Iraq is Doomed.

[Disturbed]

The US Neo Fascists have now played their cards in Najaf by attempting to put an "Iraqi" face on the attack of a Holy Shrine, via the Allawi, sham Govt. Americans may be fooled by this sham but most Iraqis damn well know better. Al Sadr will win no matter what occurs from now on, whether he is arrested or killed. 300 Million Muslims are being offended by the Neo Fascists and the sham " Iraqi Govt." Another screw-up by Dumbass and the Neo Fascists.

Iraq Sovereignty?

The Hand-Over That Wasn't: Illegal Orders give the US a Lock on Iraq's Economy
by Antonia Juhasz

Officially, the U.S. occupation of Iraq ended on June 28, 2004. But in reality, the United States is still in charge: Not only do 138,000 troops remain to control the streets, but the "100 Orders" of L. Paul Bremer III remain to control the economy.

These little noticed orders enacted by Bremer, the now-departed head of the now-defunct Coalition Provisional Authority, go to the heart of Bush administration plans in Iraq. They lock in sweeping advantages to American firms, ensuring long-term U.S. economic advantage while guaranteeing few, if any, benefits to the Iraqi people.

The Bremer orders control every aspect of Iraqi life - from the use of car horns to the privatization of state-owned enterprises. Order No. 39 alone does no less than "transition from a … centrally planned economy to a market economy" virtually overnight and by U.S. fiat.

Although many thought that the "end" of the occupation would also mean the end of the orders, on his last day in Iraq Bremer simply transferred authority for the orders to Prime Minister Iyad Allawi - a 30-year exile with close ties to the CIA and British intelligence.

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0805-07.htm

[ochazuke]

1. U.S. hedgemony

Aren't we building like four huge, permanent military bases in Iraq?

[Disturbed]

2. 14 US Military bases.

Building by a US corp.


14 US Military Bases
Under Construction In Iraq
5-19-4

Iraqis also know that 14 US military bases are already under construction, enough to accommodate the (for the moment) 110,000 American soldiers who will stay in Iraq until at least 2007. No sovereign Iraqi government has approved the construction of these bases. Kimmitt - the No 2 Pentagon man in Iraq, and the one who launched total war on Fallujah - said the bases are "a blueprint for how we could operate in the Middle East". A ring of US military bases throughout what the Pentagon calls the Greater Middle East is a key element of the neo-conservative-driven strategy to control world energy resources as the way to control the destiny of America's economic rivals - the European Union and Northeast Asia.


One Year On: From Liberation To Jihad

By Pepe Escobar

"So this is the Bush administration-sponsored "free Iraq" people identify not only in the Sunni triangle but in the Shi'ite south: an occupying power maybe not formally occupying the country any more, but installed in 14 military bases and able to exercise full control on security, the economy and the whole infrastructure. In plain English: a US colony. This is the reason the mob in Fallujah rejoiced in the burning of those American bodies. This is the reason Sunnis and Shi'ites have for now united in anger. And this is the reason the "liberation" has finally turned into a jihad."

On April 9, 2002, Saddam Hussein's statue in Firdaus Square in Baghdad was still enveloped, like a Christo installation, waiting to be unveiled in an official ceremony. On April 9, 2003, the statue was toppled by the US Army, and later replaced by a faceless figure symbolizing "liberation". On April 9, 2004, the faceless statue is plastered with photographs of "outlaw" Shi'ite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.

One year after the "fall" of Baghdad, the old colonial maxim "divide and rule" does not apply anymore. For the occupiers, this is the ultimate nightmare: Sunni and Shi'ite, united (almost) as one. From Kirkuk in the north to Karbala in the south, from Fallujah to Nasiriyah, from Ramadi to Baghdad, Iraq is in turmoil - and this is not the work of "Saddam Fedayeen", "remnants of the Ba'ath Party" or "foreign terrorists". This is the beginning of the end: the serious possibility that the Shi'ites - 60 percent or so of the invaded and "liberated" Iraqi population - will be tempted actively to lead the multifaceted Iraqi resistance.


http://www.rense.com/general53/dde.htm

[Nordic]

3. Osama talks. Bush listens.

One big reason we invaded was to put permanent military bases in the middle of the middle east that weren't in Saudi Arabia.

In affect giving Osama Bin Laden what he asked for.

He's a powerful guy, no?

[Disturbed]

4. Usama bin Laden

He made a deal with Dumbass' friends the brutal dictators of Arabia. They paid him and requested that the US Neo Fascists remove their military base from Arabia. After that, al Q. still attacked in Arabia because the Neo Fascists still have thousands of US MIC personnel in Arabia. Usama is not bent upon destroying the USA nor Arabia. One of the goals of al Q. is to remove the US presence in the ME. By invading and now occupying Iraq the Neo Fascists have widened al Q.'s popularity and placed the US in more danger.

[LibraLabSoldier]

5. Your information is flawed.

We do have bases in Saudi Arabia. I know. I was stationed at one of them. And I hate to say this, but your information is flawed. By saying 14 "bases" you are conjuring up images of huge sprawling complexes. NOt the case. Maybe instead of trying to turn Iraq into a new Vietnam, you could try actually asking someone who is actually in the military about whats going on in Iraq.

[DrWeird]

6. Oh, he's not turning it into Vietnam.

The war's doing that just fine by itself.

Just another perpetual, pointless war so that somebody can get reelected.

[LibraLabSoldier]

8. Bad Reason for going, but good will come out of it....

We didnt go to Iraq on the right pretenses. This is true. However, by the time we leave Iraq, which may admittedly not be for ffive to ten years, we will leave it a much stronger country than we found. We are doing so much good there, I dont see how the press can ignore it much longer.

[DrWeird]

10. Which good reason would that be?

More money for Halliburton or fewer baby terrorists?

[NNN0LHI]

7. If you know, tell us what is going on in Iraq

Thanks in advance and welcome to DU.

Don

[LibraLabSoldier]

11. Abu Graib

Was a failure. Military justice is dealing with these miscreants. I feel that not enough is being done at higher levels of leadership though. These lower enlisted soldiers did something reprehensible. But what you dont see are the MEDDAC soldiers who are training Iraqi paramedics and first responders, our efforts to vaccinate and protect Iraqi children from disease, and our efforts in general to improve the safety and quality of life in Iraq. By getting rid of guys like AlSadr, we are sending a clear message. We are not going to let Iraq become an oppressive theocracy like the Taliban led Afghanistan. Most Iraqis want peace, and prosperity. And they know who it is that are getting electricity to everyone, and running water, and healthcare.

[DrWeird]

13. Horseshit.

What happened at Abu Ghraib is systemic to the culture of the military in Iraq. It wasn't just a few bad apples. Everybody from Bush and Rumsfeld knew and ordered it. Prosecuting a few soldiers at the bottom is just one big coverup.

[LibraLabSoldier]

16. Not disagreeing

The reason why this happened with Reservists is that Regular Army troops would have told them "This is wrong you "expletive deleted" moron". Those of us in the Army have a very specific code of conduct to which we live. We also have the Geneva conventions, of which this was a direct violation. Had Bush actually served, he would know that. He is an insult to american fighting men and women.

[Capn Sunshine]

15. Hey, maybe if we'd STAYED in Afghanistan

It wouldn't be an oppressive theocracy led by Taliban warlords today.

This pof course excepts the twenty-eight square miles the US has secure, although after dark all bets are off.

The world record setting heroin crop in Afghanistan speaks volumes about what America stands for, soldier.

Sorry that you have to find out this way.

[Djinn]

19. problem there though is

that given a free vote the majority of Iraqi's would vote for a religious Shiite government - the US knows this fine well (so did Saddam) which is why they'll never let it happen.

As for "We are not going to let Iraq become an oppressive theocracy like the Taliban led Afghanistan" given we've now handed power to a bunch of repressive theocratic warlords - that'd be funny were it not so sad.

Before the war (and even more so before the fist Gulf war) Iraqis had plenty of clean water, medical facilities and trained doctors/nurses (a medical system on par with western nations) free education (with equal access for both sexes)

You keep stating what Iraqi's want based on talking to US soldiers, try talking to actual Iraqi's you may find a different story - it is not up to us to tell the Iraqi's what kind of government is acceptable. If they do not want a US presence (particularly for 5 or more years) it is NOT up to us to say they should have one. How long do you think an imposed government would last without US military support? How popular was the Shah of Iran again??

[Ms. Clio]

23. What a concentrated dose of propaganda

All the bullshit talking points rolled into one tidy, suspicious-smelling little bundle.

Yeah.

Things that make you go hmmmmm...

[K-W]

9. No he conjured the images of bases.

14 US bases is 14 US bases, dont try to downplay what we are doing in Iraq.

[LibraLabSoldier]

12. Sure.....

And you know exactly what our military is doing in Iraq? Are you affiliated with the military? No? I am. Your fear mongering cant change the facts.

[DrWeird]

14. Well, when they're riding grandmothers around like donkeys...

they're busy raping children.

[NNN0LHI]

17. Give it up soldier. What we are doing in Iraq now is wrong

It ain't your fault, but the truth will set you free. The Iraqis are not going to let us steal their oil without one hell of a fight. Be great if they would just lay down and let us steal it. But these people are not ignorant savages. They are far more patient than us Americans are too. Plus, where they gonna go? They have only two choices. Death or victory. Thats it. We have other options. And when the price becomes too high, the US will exercise those other options. The Iraqis don't have to beat us to win. They just have to hold on until it becomes too costly for us to continue any more. It is simple mathmatics. Yep, I have seen this movie before. Had a terrible ending too. Take care, and see you later.

Don

[Blue_Roses]

24. he's from Oklahoma and a gun collector

why bother. That says it all. And another thing --he's NOT the only soldier in this country. Just cause he seems to think it's so, leads me to believe it isn't. I know car salesmen who are more honest that this guy.

Clear as scotch tape.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

18. 80% of the Iraqis want us out of their country.

Perhaps they would prefer building their own schools, have their own doctors, their own cops.

[Djinn]

20. so you were based in Saudi

you're now back in the states yet you know what's happening in Iraq because you happen to be in the military...excuse while I roll around on the floor for a bit

[karlrschneider]

21. Your pro says you're in Lawton (I'm just out of Wagoner, other side of OK)

How do you know what is going on in Iraq? You haven't yet claimed to have BEEN there...are you just listening to the lying bastards in the Chimp administration? Or do you know something the world press doesn't...?

[SOS]

22. Okay

Here's what the Chicago Tribune reported in March 2004:

"U.S. engineers are focusing on constructing 14 "enduring bases," long-term encampments for the thousands of American troops expected to serve in Iraq for at least two years. The bases also would be key outposts for Bush administration policy advisers.

As the U.S. scales back its military presence in Saudi Arabia, Iraq provides an option for an administration eager to maintain a robust military presence in the Middle East. The number of U.S. military personnel in Iraq, between 105,000 and 110,000, is expected to remain unchanged through 2006, according to military planners.
The U.S. plans to operate from former Iraqi bases in Baghdad, Mosul, Taji, Balad, Kirkuk and in areas near Nasiriyah, near Tikrit, near Fallujah and between Irbil and Kirkuk
Dollar figures have not been released. The Defense Department plans to build the bases under its own contracts separate from the State Department and its Embassy in Baghdad."

Is this information correct or false?

[JohnyCanuck]

25. Don't forget PNAC's

Rebuilding America's Defenses white paper which stated, "Indeed, the United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein." (emphasis mine /jc) Rebuilding America's Defenses Pg 14 (Adobe Acrobat required to view).

When the PNAC brainiacs drew up their plans for invading Iraq and deposing Saddam I'd say it was a pretty fair bet that they had (and probably still have today) every intention of establishing military bases in Iraq from which they could launch further wars and invasions against any remaining Middle Eastern regimes which had the temerity to refuse to say, "How high?" when the USA said jump or, "How much more?" when the USA said, "Pump more oil."


From Will Pitt's Truthout.org article on PNAC:

Of Gods and Mortals and Empire

Vice President Dick Cheney is a founding member of PNAC, along with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Defense Policy Board chairman Richard Perle. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz is the ideological father of the group. Bruce Jackson, a PNAC director, served as a Pentagon official for Ronald Reagan before leaving government service to take a leading position with the weapons manufacturer Lockheed Martin.

PNAC is staffed by men who previously served with groups like Friends of the Democratic Center in Central America, which supported America's bloody gamesmanship in Nicaragua and El Salvador, and with groups like The Committee for the Present Danger, which spent years advocating that a nuclear war with the Soviet Union was "winnable."

<snip>

In August of 2002, Defense Policy Board chairman and PNAC member Richard Perle heard a policy briefing from a think tank associated with the Rand Corporation. According to the Washington Post and The Nation, the final slide of this presentation described "Iraq as the tactical pivot, Saudi Arabia as the strategic pivot, and Egypt as the prize" in a war that would purportedly be about ridding the world of Saddam Hussein's weapons. Bush has deployed massive forces into the Mideast region, while simultaneously engaging American forces in the Philippines and playing nuclear chicken with North Korea. Somewhere in all this lurks at least one of the "major theater wars" desired by the September 2000 PNAC report.

Iraq is but the beginning, a pretense for a wider conflict. Donald Kagan, a central member of PNAC, sees America establishing permanent military bases in Iraq after the war. This is purportedly a measure to defend the peace in the Middle East, and to make sure the oil flows. The nations in that region, however, will see this for what it is: a jump-off point for American forces to invade any nation in that region they choose to. The American people, anxiously awaiting some sort of exit plan after America defeats Iraq, will see too late that no exit is planned.

http://truthout.org/docs_02/022203A.htm

More on PNAC here as well (LunaC's GD thread PNAC 101): http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=2234142

[onebigbadwulf]

26. ANY non-fascist government in Iraq is doomed....

unless Iraq is divided into three countries.