Congratulations! Iraq finally got Freedom, Human Right & Democracy - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-08-2008, 07:44 AM   #1
War Child
 
butter7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 785
Local Time: 07:41 PM
Congratulations! Iraq finally got Freedom, Human Right & Democracy

Congratulations! Iraq finally got Freedom, Human Right & Democracy!!

Quote:
Revealed: Secret plan to keep Iraq under US control

Bush wants 50 military bases, control of Iraqi airspace and legal immunity for all American soldiers and contractors

By Patrick Cockburn
Thursday, 5 June 2008

A secret deal being negotiated in Baghdad would perpetuate the American military occupation of Iraq indefinitely, regardless of the outcome of the US presidential election in November.

The terms of the impending deal, details of which have been leaked to The Independent, are likely to have an explosive political effect in Iraq. Iraqi officials fear that the accord, under which US troops would occupy permanent bases, conduct military operations, arrest Iraqis and enjoy immunity from Iraqi law, will destabilise Iraq's position in the Middle East and lay the basis for unending conflict in their country.

But the accord also threatens to provoke a political crisis in the US. President Bush wants to push it through by the end of next month so he can declare a military victory and claim his 2003 invasion has been vindicated. But by perpetuating the US presence in Iraq, the long-term settlement would undercut pledges by the Democratic presidential nominee, Barack Obama, to withdraw US troops if he is elected president in November.

The timing of the agreement would also boost the Republican candidate, John McCain, who has claimed the United States is on the verge of victory in Iraq – a victory that he says Mr Obama would throw away by a premature military withdrawal.

America currently has 151,000 troops in Iraq and, even after projected withdrawals next month, troop levels will stand at more than 142,000 – 10 000 more than when the military "surge" began in January 2007. Under the terms of the new treaty, the Americans would retain the long-term use of more than 50 bases in Iraq. American negotiators are also demanding immunity from Iraqi law for US troops and contractors, and a free hand to carry out arrests and conduct military activities in Iraq without consulting the Baghdad government.

The precise nature of the American demands has been kept secret until now. The leaks are certain to generate an angry backlash in Iraq. "It is a terrible breach of our sovereignty," said one Iraqi politician, adding that if the security deal was signed it would delegitimise the government in Baghdad which will be seen as an American pawn.

The US has repeatedly denied it wants permanent bases in Iraq but one Iraqi source said: "This is just a tactical subterfuge." Washington also wants control of Iraqi airspace below 29,000ft and the right to pursue its "war on terror" in Iraq, giving it the authority to arrest anybody it wants and to launch military campaigns without consultation.

Mr Bush is determined to force the Iraqi government to sign the so-called "strategic alliance" without modifications, by the end of next month. But it is already being condemned by the Iranians and many Arabs as a continuing American attempt to dominate the region. Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the powerful and usually moderate Iranian leader, said yesterday that such a deal would create "a permanent occupation". He added: "The essence of this agreement is to turn the Iraqis into slaves of the Americans."

Iraq's Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki, is believed to be personally opposed to the terms of the new pact but feels his coalition government cannot stay in power without US backing.

The deal also risks exacerbating the proxy war being fought between Iran and the United States over who should be more influential in Iraq.

Although Iraqi ministers have said they will reject any agreement limiting Iraqi sovereignty, political observers in Baghdad suspect they will sign in the end and simply want to establish their credentials as defenders of Iraqi independence by a show of defiance now. The one Iraqi with the authority to stop deal is the majority Shia spiritual leader, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. In 2003, he forced the US to agree to a referendum on the new Iraqi constitution and the election of a parliament. But he is said to believe that loss of US support would drastically weaken the Iraqi Shia, who won a majority in parliament in elections in 2005.

The US is adamantly against the new security agreement being put to a referendum in Iraq, suspecting that it would be voted down. The influential Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr has called on his followers to demonstrate every Friday against the impending agreement on the grounds that it compromises Iraqi independence.

The Iraqi government wants to delay the actual signing of the agreement but the office of Vice-President Dick Cheney has been trying to force it through. The US ambassador in Baghdad, Ryan Crocker, has spent weeks trying to secure the accord.

The signature of a security agreement, and a parallel deal providing a legal basis for keeping US troops in Iraq, is unlikely to be accepted by most Iraqis. But the Kurds, who make up a fifth of the population, will probably favour a continuing American presence, as will Sunni Arab political leaders who want US forces to dilute the power of the Shia. The Sunni Arab community, which has broadly supported a guerrilla war against US occupation, is likely to be split.
Plus, the United States took control of all of the Iraqi government’s bank accounts, including the income from oil sales, I think it's the time to congrate Iraq people for finally have Freedom, Human Right & Democracy!
__________________

__________________
butter7 is offline  
Old 06-08-2008, 07:54 AM   #2
Blue Crack Distributor
 
bono_212's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 81,105
Local Time: 12:41 AM
God I usually don't post in here because I'm no where near as well spoken as some people, most people, but I can't not say something.

I just don't understand. I don't understand how these things can be allowed to happen. How a government that was once fairly noble and good, could have sunk so far. I love my country, but I can't be proud of it when events like this occur. I guess here's hoping that it doesn't go through
__________________

__________________
bono_212 is offline  
Old 06-08-2008, 08:09 AM   #3
War Child
 
butter7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 785
Local Time: 07:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bono_212 View Post
God I usually don't post in here because I'm no where near as well spoken as some people, most people, but I can't not say something.

I just don't understand. I don't understand how these things can be allowed to happen. How a government that was once fairly noble and good, could have sunk so far. I love my country, but I can't be proud of it when events like this occur. I guess here's hoping that it doesn't go through
No, I think the US government should be the model for the rest of the world. US people elected the government, and they made the smart choice. The US government should serves American people, not Iraq people. By signing this agreement, it could help your guys have cheaper gas for the car, the money from the oil sale, probably could provide some help for your kids' school.

However, if you think it's wrong, it's your guys' duty to DO something. All in all, it's all done for America's interest.
__________________
butter7 is offline  
Old 06-08-2008, 10:03 AM   #4
ONE
love, blood, life
 
U2isthebest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vision over visibility....
Posts: 12,332
Local Time: 04:41 AM
That's beside the point. Iraq is a sovereign nation. The U.S. government has no business wanting anything that would prevent the Iraqi government from doing its job. The legal immunity clause enrages me. It's because of immunity and transparent loopholes that the contractors from Blackwater weren't even tried for their despicable crime of opening fire on and killing Iraqi women and children. We have no business allowing our military to run around unchecked and unbound by the rule of law in another country. That's a slap in the face to the democracy we were supposedly trying to create. ( I believe that was the second spin the Bush administration gave for the reason we invaded Iraq after it became clear the original WMD explanation was false.) This will do nothing but harm our reputation in the Arab world (and most of the world, period), by showing that at least under Bush, we're nothing but an imperial, greedy, power-hungry monster. This will continue to make Iraqis vulnerable to the flood of terrorist groups who entered Iraq after to the invasion knowing bitter, frusturated Iraqis would be easy targets. This has created the insurgent movement that has risen up all over the country. I echo bono_212 by saying I can't believe how far our government has fallen in 7 years. The Bush administration will be remembered as the most corrupt, greedy, incompetent, arrogant and all around worst in U.S. history. If the Iraq government has any respect for itself, its country, and its people; they will not sign this ridiculous agreement until and unless serious concessions are made by the Bush administration.
__________________
U2isthebest is offline  
Old 06-08-2008, 10:49 AM   #5
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 03:41 AM
DefenseLink News Transcript: Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz Interview with Sam Tannenhaus, Vanity Fair
DefenseLink News Transcript: Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz Interview with Karen DeYoung, Washington Post

Quote:
Wolfowitz: I think the two most important things next are the two most obvious. One is getting post-Saddam Iraq right. Getting it right may take years, but setting the conditions for getting it right in the next six months. The next six months are going to be very important.

The other thing is trying to get some progress on the Israeli-Palestinian issue. I do think we have a better atmosphere for working on it now than we did before in all kinds of ways. Whether that's enough to make a difference is not certain, but I will be happy to go back and dig up the things I said a long time ago which is, while it undoubtedly was true that if we could make progress on the Israeli-Palestinian issue we would provide a better set of circumstances to deal with Saddam Hussein, but that it was equally true the other way around that if we could deal with Saddam Hussein it would provide a better set of circumstances for dealing with the Arab-Israeli issue. That you had to move on both of them as best you could when you could, but --

There are a lot of things that are different now, and one that has gone by almost unnoticed--but it's huge--is that by complete mutual agreement between the U.S. and the Saudi government we can now remove almost all of our forces from Saudi Arabia. Their presence there over the last 12 years has been a source of enormous difficulty for a friendly government. It's been a huge recruiting device for al Qaeda. In fact if you look at bin Laden, one of his principle grievances was the presence of so-called crusader forces on the holy land, Mecca and Medina. I think just lifting that burden from the Saudis is itself going to open the door to other positive things.

I don't want to speak in messianic terms. It's not going to change things overnight, but it's a huge improvement.
That's the reasoning behind these permanent bases in Iraq. From the beginning, it was hoped that the U.S. could remove its military forces out of Saudi Arabia, which they knew inflamed bin Laden and Al-Qaeda, in particular, who objected vehemently to the idea of foreign military bases on such "sacred ground."

Nevertheless, while this has been part of the plan, at least since 2003 (I wouldn't doubt that it stretches back to the late 1990s PNAC days), I imagine it is probably a bit naive of them to think that merely shifting troop presence from the Arabian Peninsula to Iraq will placate terrorists. Iraq, itself, is now a cause célèbre all its own, alongside Palestine.
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 06-08-2008, 02:23 PM   #6
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 12:41 AM
Quote:
US issues threat to Iraq's $50bn foreign reserves in military deal

By Patrick Cockburn
Friday, 6 June 2008


Under the planned pact, reported in The Independent yesterday, US soldiers in Iraq will enjoy legal immunity


The US is holding hostage some $50bn (£25bn) of Iraq's money in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to pressure the Iraqi government into signing an agreement seen by many Iraqis as prolonging the US occupation indefinitely, according to information leaked to The Independent.

US negotiators are using the existence of $20bn in outstanding court judgments against Iraq in the US, to pressure their Iraqi counterparts into accepting the terms of the military deal, details of which were reported for the first time in this newspaper yesterday.

US issues threat to Iraq's $50bn foreign reserves in military deal - Middle East, World - The Independent

Is the U S is setting the template for how China will archive their goals in the next 100 years?
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 06-08-2008, 02:54 PM   #7
ONE
love, blood, life
 
U2isthebest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vision over visibility....
Posts: 12,332
Local Time: 04:41 AM
^Now the Bush administration condones blackmail? So they went from down home "good ol' boys" to mobsters? Un-fucking-believable. This should be front page news in every paper and the top story on every news channel. It's time these fools start accounting to the American people for their actions
__________________

__________________
U2isthebest is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com