Our Awful Situation

Archive for the ‘Iraq’ Category

At Last, Some Truth About Iraq and Afghanistan

Posted by patriot on June 25th, 2008

No, it’s not about oil! They hate us because we’re free, right? Or so I’ve been told…

After a sea of lies and a tsunami of propaganda, the ugly truth behind the Iraq and Afghanistan wars finally emerged into full view this week.

Four major western oil companies, Exxon, Mobil, Shell, BP and Total, are about to sign US-brokered no-bid contracts with the US-installed Baghdad regime to begin exploiting Iraq’s oil fields. Saddam Hussein had kicked these firms out three decades ago when he nationalized Iraq’s foreign-owned oil industry for the benefit of Iraq’s national development. The Baghdad regime is turning back the clock.

This agreement comes as talks are continuing between the Washington and its Baghdad client regime over future US basing rights in Iraq. After some face-saving Iraqi objections, it is expected that Baghdad will sign a compact with Washington giving US forces control of Iraq and its air space in a manner very similar to Great Britain’s colonial arrangement with Iraq.

Interestingly, the same oil companies that used to exploit Iraq when it was a British colony are now returning. As former US Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan recently admitted, the Iraq war was all about oil. VP Dick Cheney stated in 2003 that the invasion of Iraq was about oil, and for the sake of Israel.

House leaders fund another year of Iraqi disaster

Posted by patriot on June 18th, 2008

Lovely.. no restrictions on your tax dollars:

House Democratic and Republican leaders have reached a deal on a war funding bill that will fund military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan into early 2009, several congressional sources said Tuesday.

The bill includes $165 billion to fund the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq through the rest of this year and into early 2009, without any restrictions on the money.

Tomgram: Why We Can’t See America’s Ziggurats in Iraq

Posted by Charlie Kilo on June 16th, 2008

Finally, the U.S. Mega-Bases in Iraq Make the News:

It’s just a $5,812,353 contract — chump change for the Pentagon — and not even one of those notorious “no-bid” contracts either. Ninety-eight bids were solicited by the Army Corps of Engineers and 12 were received before the contract was awarded this May 28th to Wintara, Inc. of Fort Washington, Maryland, for “replacement facilities for Forward Operating Base Speicher, Iraq.” According to a Department of Defense press release, the work on those “facilities” to be replaced at the base near Saddam Hussein’s hometown, Tikrit, is expected to be completed by January 31, 2009, a mere 11 days after a new president enters the Oval Office. It is but one modest reminder that, when the next administration hits Washington, American bases in Iraq, large and small, will still be undergoing the sort of repair and upgrading that has been ongoing for years.

In fact, in the last five-plus years, untold billions of taxpayer dollars have been spent on the construction and upgrading of those bases. When asked back in the fall of 2003, only months after Baghdad fell to U.S. troops, Lt. Col. David Holt, the Army engineer then “tasked with facilities development” in Iraq, proudly indicated that “several billion dollars” had already been invested in those fast-rising bases. Even then, he was suitably amazed, commenting that “the numbers are staggering.” Imagine what he might have said, barely two and a half years later, when the U.S. reportedly had 106 bases, mega to micro, all across the country.

By now, billions have evidently gone into single massive mega-bases like the U.S. air base at Balad, about 60 miles north of Baghdad. It’s a “16-square-mile fortress,” housing perhaps 40,000 U.S. troops, contractors, special ops types, and Defense Department employees. As the Washington Post’s Tom Ricks, who visited Balad back in 2006, pointed out — in a rare piece on one of our mega-bases — it’s essentially “a small American town smack in the middle of the most hostile part of Iraq.” Back then, air traffic at the base was already being compared to Chicago’s O’Hare International or London’s Heathrow — and keep in mind that Balad has been steadily upgraded ever since to support an “air surge” that, unlike the President’s 2007 “surge” of 30,000 ground troops, has yet to end.

In Debate Over Permanent Bases In Iraq, U.S. Seeks Authorization For War In Iran

Posted by patriot on June 12th, 2008

Via Think Progress:

The ongoing negotiations between Iraqi leaders and the Bush administration over the future role of the military occupation “have turned into an increasingly acrimonious public debate.”

The Bush administration’s demand for 58 permanent bases in Iraq — a near doubling of the current 30 bases — are causing Iraqis to warn that the status of forces agreement would be “more abominable than the occupation.” The administration is reportedly holding hostage “some $50bn of Iraq’s money in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to pressure the Iraqi government into signing an agreement.”

The reason the White House is so hell-bent on signing a long-term agreement may have less to do with Iraq and more to do with Iran. According to press reports of the ongoing negotiations, the Bush administration is seeking the “power to determine if a hostile act from another country is aggression against Iraq.”

Bush and German Chancellor Merkel stress diplomacy with Iran

Posted by Charlie Kilo on June 11th, 2008

Bush: Should we or shouldn’t we…ask me again tomorrow:

President Bush on Wednesday raised unprompted the possibility of a military strike against Tehran’s presumed nuclear weapons ambitions, speaking bullishly on Iran even as he admitted having been unwise to do so previously about Iraq.

Bush’s host in two days of meetings at a baroque castle, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, made clear her views on the saber-rattling - however subtle - without directly countering her guest. “I very clearly pin my hopes on diplomatic efforts,” Merkel said, reflecting the deeply held European opinion that military action against Iran is nearly unthinkable.

Iran’s leader weighed in, too. Speaking before thousands in the central Iranian city of Shahr-e-Kord, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Bush “won’t be able to harm even one centimeter of the sacred land of Iran” and promised continued defiance over Iran’s nuclear activities. Iran says it is enriching uranium to generate electricity, not build a bomb - a claim the West doubts is true.

“In the past two-three years, they employed all their might, resorted to propaganda … and sanctions,” Ahmadinejad said. “If the enemy thinks they can break the Iranian nation with pressure, they are wrong.”

Bush has alternated lately between slightly more conciliatory and slightly more forceful language on Iran.

U.S. seeking 58 bases in Iraq, Shiite lawmakers say

Posted by Charlie Kilo on June 10th, 2008

100 years may be less time than they are really thinking:

Iraqi lawmakers say the United States is demanding 58 bases as part of a proposed “status of forces” agreement that will allow U.S. troops to remain in the country indefinitely.

Leading members of the two ruling Shiite parties said in a series of interviews the Iraqi government rejected this proposal along with another U.S. demand that would have effectively handed over to the United States the power to determine if a hostile act from another country is aggression against Iraq. Lawmakers said they fear this power would drag Iraq into a war between the United States and Iran.

USA in Iraq… forever?

Posted by patriot on June 5th, 2008

That’s what the PTB seem to want:

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.

Soldiers using drop weapons to claim innocent deaths were justified

Posted by patriot on June 3rd, 2008

From the HuffPost:

Several soldiers who have returned from combat zones talk with the American News Project about what they say is the widespread practice of using “drop weapons” to cover up the killing of innocent civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan. We feature five veterans and current members of Iraq Veterans Against the War, plus retired Lieutenant Colonel Gary Solis, a Vietnam War veteran and legal scholar who taught “Law of War” at West Point. Watch the video from ANP below:

Rumsfeld: Terror Attack could help the Neocons

Posted by patriot on May 16th, 2008

Looks like the neocons are wanting another new pearl harbor:

Shocking excerpts of confidential recordings recently released under the Freedom of Information Act feature former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld talking with top military analysts about how a flagging Neo-Con political agenda could be successfully restored with the aid of another terrorist attack on America.

The tape also includes a conversation where Rumsfeld and the military analysts agree on the possible necessity of installing a brutal dictator in Iraq to oversee U.S. interests.

Pentagon Backs Plan To Build U.S. ‘Zone Of Influence’ Of Hotels And Resorts In Baghdad

Posted by Charlie Kilo on May 5th, 2008

Swimming pools, shopping malls, and suicide bombers:

The White House has repeatedly insisted that the United States has “no desire for permanent bases” in Iraq. Nevertheless, the Bush administration is seeking to leave its footprint on Iraq through other means. The AP reports that the Pentagon is backing a $5 billion dollar plan to “transform the U.S.-protected Green Zone” into a “centerpiece for Baghdad’s future,” resulting in “big paydays for early investors“