Revealed: Secret plan to keep Iraq under US control

[FieldDiscipline]

Any thoughts?

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.

Plenty more here.

 

[Archangel M]

The Independent

While The Independent claims to represent contrasting political opinions, and argued that a hung parliament would be the best outcome of the 2005 General Election, its politics are probably closest to those of Liberal Democrats. A MORI Poll taken between April-June 2000 showed that 60% of Independent readers were Labour Party voters (cited in International Socialism Spring 2003, ISBN 1-898876-97-5). A 2004 poll by MORI showed that 39% of its readers were Liberal Democrat voters whilst 36% supported Labour.

The stereotypical reader of The Independent is politically left-wing and a Liberal Democrat, or perhaps a Labour voter and interested in issues concerning the environment.[citation needed] These values are directly reflected in the newspaper's style. The paper's editorial line favours the implementation of proportional representation and the tackling of climate change through governmental measures. However it is not uncommon for the editorials to cover right-wing ideas, thus making it difficult to place the paper on the political spectrum.

In recent years, it has often had critical, editorial-style front page spreads on George W. Bush, Tony Blair, and Israeli government policies. As part of its criticism, The Independent accused Israel of being guilty of using uranium-based shells in Lebanon. This accusation turned out to be false.[5][6][7]

Same media...different country...

 

[JBrainard]

The Independent
Same media...different country...

As much as I love Bush-bashing, in all fairness Archangel's point should be considered.

 

[elder999]

As much as I love Bush-bashing, in all fairness Archangel's point should be considered.

U.S. Not Seeking Permanent Iraq Bases, Ambassador Says

WASHINGTON — The United States ambassador to Iraq on Thursday dismissed any suggestion that the Bush administration is maneuvering to set up permanent military bases in Iraq.

“I’m very comfortable saying to you, to the Iraqis, to anyone who asks, that, no indeed, we are not seeking permanent bases, either explicitly or implicitly,” Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker said at a State Department news briefing.

Mr. Crocker commented at length, and sometimes disdainfully, on a London newspaper report of “a secret plan” whereby the United States would keep 50 permanent military bases in Iraq, keep control of Iraqi airspace and insist on legal immunity for American soldiers and contractors.

 

[FieldDiscipline]

Interesting. Thanks.

I'm not an independant reader usually, for the reasons in Archangel's quote but this I found this by accident.

Elder's post closed that down pretty quickly. There's nothing like journolistic accuracy eh?

 

[elder999]

Interesting. Thanks.

I'm not an independant reader usually, for the reasons in Archangel's quote but this I found this by accident.

Elder's post closed that down pretty quickly. There's nothing like journolistic accuracy eh?

.....and I' such a BuSh-basher, too....:lol:

 

[Makalakumu]

U.S. Not Seeking Permanent Iraq Bases, Ambassador Says

The Bush Administration can say anything they want. They won't be making the decision to keep the troops there. It will be the next president. Wanna find out what's going to happen? Take a look at what the other candidates are saying...or not saying.

 

[elder999]

The Bush Administration can say anything they want. They won't be making the decision to keep the troops there. It will be the next president. Wanna find out what's going to happen? Take a look at what the other candidates are saying...or not saying.

Obama pretty much intends to maintain the Green Zone, Bagdhad Airport, the U.S. Embassy and contractor support.....don't know what's going to happen, though, as I'm sure McCain's intentions are somewhat more overt.

Thread was about a non-existent Bush plan, though.....

 

[Makalakumu]

Obama pretty much intends to maintain the Green Zone, Bagdhad Airport, the U.S. Embassy and contractor support.....don't know what's going to happen, though, as I'm sure McCain's intentions are somewhat more overt.

Thread was about a non-existent Bush plan, though.....

Whatever plan is concocted by whichever manchurian candidate takes office, will just be a continuation of the "bush" plan. Which really isn't the "bush" plan, he takes his orders too...