Guest guest Posted July 18, 2007 Report Share Posted July 18, 2007 At 08:12 AM 7/18/07, you wrote: >ZNet: Plan Iraq - Permanent Occupation Because of Peak Oil >Posted by: " Mark Graffis " mgraffis mgraffis >Tue Jul 17, 2007 6:48 am (PST) >http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15 & ItemID=13304 > >ZNet | Iraq > >Plan Iraq - Permanent Occupation > >by Stephen Lendman; July 17, 2007 > >Congress is back from its July 4 break and with it more bluster and >political posturing on changing course to keep things the same, including >everything not working in place. It's the same old scheme, back again, to >fool enough of the people all the time and most all of them long enough to >move on to the next change of course mission shift starting the whole >cycle over again. Even the blind can see the hopelessness of staying the >course in Iraq. Aside from its lawlessness and immorality, pushing on with >a failed effort qualifies as a classic definition of insanity - continuing >the same failed policies, expecting different results. > >The only sensible, honorable option is a full, speedy withdrawal along >with providing multi-billions for Iraqis to rebuild what we destroyed and >have no intention restoring now or ever beyond what's needed for permanent >occupation. The only other honorable option is owning up to what no one in >Washington or the major media will do - that the Iraq and Afghan conflicts >are illegal wars of aggression making those responsible for them in the >administration and Congress war criminals warranting prosecution for their >crimes. > >That won't happen nor will the administration and Congress do anything >more substantive than say one thing and do another. It's been an unbroken >pattern since 9/11, and especially on Afghanistan and throughout the >run-up to the Iraq invasion. Both wars were sold through lies and deceit. >They're based on a fictitious " outside enemy " threat without which no " war >on terrorism " could exist, and no imperial foreign wars could be waged. > >They're possible only by scaring the public enough to believe the threat >is still real, and " Enemy Number One " Osama bin Laden (recruited through >Pakistan's ISI as a CIA asset in the 1980s) and Al-Queda represent it. So >with Saddam gone and no WMDs found, staying the course is vital to the >nation's security even when, in fact, the truth is the opposite, crying >wolf's wearing thin, and selling snake oil solutions get harder to do. But >schemers keep trying with complicit Democrats as much part of the scam as >Republicans and Bush loyalists, dwindling down to a precious hard line few >but still around in key positions making noise. > >With " the walls of Jericho " crumbling around him as the world's most hated >man and the ship of state listing badly, a pathetic caricature of a >president keeps pleading for more time. He claims it's needed to head off >the threat of " mass killing on a horrific scale " in Iraq and plenty at >home as well. He then continues using the same timeworn line that the war >can be won, the " surge " is working, give it a chance, and withdrawing will >be disastrous. Be more patient, and we'll know more in September we're told. > >The Iraqi puppet government gets blamed for what's gone wrong with no one >in Washington pointing the finger where it belongs. George Bush can do no >better than keep asking Congress and the public " to give (generalissimo) >David Petraeus a chance to come back (September 15) and tell us whether >his (unworkable) strategy is working, and then we can work together on a >way forward (further over the cliff). " > >At his July 12 news conference, he never mentioned and attending shameless >journalists never pressed him on CIA Director Michael Hayden's earlier >bleak assessment of things on the ground. He called the Iraqi puppet >government " unable to govern " and its inability to do it " irreversible. " >Also not discussed was the July UN refugee agency's plea for doubling its >Iraq funding to $123 million for the growing humanitarian needs of an >estimated 2000 people fleeing uncontrollable violence in the country daily >(60,000 a month) and an estimated four million or more displaced refugees >within and outside the country. > >No comment or questions were raised either on what journalists Chris >Hedges and Laila Al-Arian (daughter of US political prisoner Sami >Al-Arian) reported in the July 30 issue of The Nation. Based on interviews >with 50 returning Iraq combat veterans (ranking from privates to >captains), they wrote about " disturbing patterns of behavior by American >troops " and an indiscriminate use of force (with pictures to prove it) >amounting to a " depraved enterprise. " Mentioned were accounts of American >troops gratuitously killing Iraqi civilians, including children, that >these actions are common, go unreported, are rarely investigated, and >almost always go unpunished. > >George Bush's comments (and most others) ignore as well that over 7 in 10 >Americans favor a force withdrawal, over 60% say the war was a mistake, >only one in five believe the " surge " improved things, and new polls keep >showing the numbers getting worse the longer the conflict continues. It's >got the president's approval rating barely above the lowest ever >registered since polling began with Richard Nixon, Harry Truman, during >the unpopular Korean war, Jimmy Carter, briefly in 1980, and his own >father sharing bottom honors. > >Maybe George Bush is kept above rock bottom through some creative >manipulation of the data or the result of what questions were asked, to >whom, the phrasing used, and the order in which they were presented. It >seems likely for the most despised, distrusted and disgraced US president >ever. Even clever pollsters, however, can't salvage Dick Cheney's rating. >At a bottom-scraping 12% reported, it's the lowest number scored for a >president or vice-president ever, by far and then some. > >The reason is simple. A decisive majority in the country think the war's >unwinnable, was a mistake, want it ended, and know it was based on lies. >People resent being had. Even through heavily filtered mainstream news >reports, they know the situation on the ground is out of control and an >appalling US-inflicted crime against humanity atrocity of enormous >proportions. > >No one in Iraq is safe anywhere, even in the heavily secured, >fortress-like Green Zone becoming more like an embattled one daily with >regular attacks on it causing damage, injuries and deaths. Few are >reported, but one on July 10 was with two to three dozen katyusha rockets >and mortar rounds striking inside the world's " ultimate gated community " >killing at least three persons and wounding 25 or more. Throughout the >country, violence long ago spiraled out of control, and since the " surge " >began in February, even the Pentagon admits things are worse, not better, >in its quarterly April - June report to Congress. > >It contradicts generalissimo Petraeus' claim of " astonishing signs of >normalcy " in Baghdad overall and " breathtaking " progress even though he >(and others high up) earlier said repeatedly there's no military solution >to the conflict. The only thing " breathtaking " about Petraeus is his >inconsistency and that he's either more incompetent than Custer at the > " Little Bighorn " or a man who'll say anything to please George Bush. On >the ground, in fact, civilian deaths are higher than ever. They number >well over 5000 a month known about and countless others never reported, >the claimed June numbers notwithstanding that are too low to be believed >and should be discounted and ignored as meaningless. In addition, US >forces are sustaining more attacks and suffered the highest level of >listed fatalities and injuries in the latest three month April - June >period since the war began. > >Nearly everyone outside the administration and Congress knows the war is >lost, but no one's brave enough to admit it or do anything about it. So >shifting mission means " damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead " with the >dominant media always in tow to shape the facts on the ground to fit the >policy. Admiral Farragut would be proud. > >Now it's back to the political drawing board with a repackaged new scheme >certain to end up little different from the last one. Ideas floating >promise a substantial drawdown of troops leaving behind what's claimed is >needed to maintain security for the Iraqi people that's killing thousands >of them every month. All NATO combined can't contain the hate and growing >opposition in both war zones matched against any size occupying force put >in place to contain them. Iraq and Afghanistan have a long history of >resisting occupiers and a successful record of ousting them in the end. It >will be the same this time as earlier after many more lives are lost in a >futile effort to prove otherwise. > >In Iraq and Afghanistan, the struggle for liberation is on the ground. At >home, shifting mission is being concocted by scared politicians up for >reelection in 2008. They'll face millions of angry voters fed up with wars >they want ended and ready to throw out the bums who won't do it. So it's >back to political posturing (again) with Democrats and Republicans trying >to convince voters this time they mean it, and what they say is what >they'll follow through on. It's the same old repackaged scam in the >nation's capitol where nothing can be taken on its face. It's high time >the public realized the criminal class there is bipartisan, and nothing >short of a new breed of uncorrupted officials will change things. And that >won't happen until enough fed up voters elect them. > >For now it's business as usual, and summer battle lines have the > " intrepid " Democrat-led Congress and a few nervous Republican defectors >facing off with the Bush administration on the FY 2008 DOD budget. It >calls for an astonishing $648.8 billion plus an additional $142 billion >war supplemental likely to end up topping $800 billion when the dust >settles and usual pork is added in. Debate will play out the same as last >year with Democrats in the end failing to use the one constitutional power >Congress alone has - the appropriation authority to cut off funding and >end the Bush administration's imperial adventurism once and for all. No >money, no wars, that simple. > >It's apparently too simple, and all that's likely ahead is more >disingenuous posturing over restricting troop deployments and setting an >open-ended timetable for an unspecified partial withdrawal at the >discretion of the administration taking full advantage to do as it >pleases. And if that doesn't work, George Bush promises to veto any >legislation setting timelines for withdrawal he'll ignore even if >overridden. On July 10, he repeated his earlier statements that Iraq troop >levels " will be decided by our commanders on the ground (obeying White >House orders), not by political figures in Washington, DC " (except him, >Dick Cheney and their hard line cronies. > >The president has no more to fear from " opposition " Democrats and > " defecting " Republicans than he had before, but he's quivering anyway. >Their posturing (and his) is as phony now as immediately post-9/11 in >selling the Afghan war and enacting police state laws. It's as bad as in >pre-March, 2003, last year's budget debate, and this spring's agreement to >continue funding through September with George Bush certifying (on his >word alone) progress is being made and Iraqis are carrying their share of >the burden that's impossible because the world's only superpower can't >handle its own. > >But note Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's compromising language with a >September 15 administration/Pentagon accountability report upcoming: " The >war is headed in a dangerous direction, and Americans are united in the >belief that we cannot wait until the administration's September report >before we change course in Iraq. " His next statement shows he's not >preaching pullout but only says " We cannot ask our military to continue to >fight without a strategy for success (never mind there is none short of >full, unconditional withdrawal), and we certainly cannot ask them to fight >before they are ready to do so. " > >He's referring to deployment lengths (unchanged after July 11 Senate >amendments were blocked) and concern for a broken military the Pentagon >already admits to. The likely outcome of current debate will be the same >quick fix as before, save for a few dubious amendments achieving nothing. >In the end, the compromise solution will be to kick the can down the road >and throw lots more money at the problem hoping it will go away. It'll >only get worse. No amount can salvage a lost war, lawmakers and the >Pentagon know it, but solutions like last year and this spring are coming >with bloated budgets getting more bloated. > >Ignore meaningless party line votes like the one the House passed July 12 >for withdrawing most combat troops by April 1, 2008. Not while this >administration's in power, and so far, the Senate's going nowhere. It >can't get the 60 votes needed to prevent a Republican promised filibuster, >and votes cast in both Houses are to deceive voters, not get action. >They're made knowing they're safe with George Bush promising to veto any >change of course and can make it stick. > >The wars will thus continue to progress in an endless cycle of more >spending with no results beyond growing deficits, intensifying public >anger, greater violence on the ground, and defeats getting worse as the >conflicts drag on. George Bush calls it " progress. I know we can succeed >in Iraq, and I know we must " he said on July 12. Incredibly, he claimed it >on eight trivial military benchmarks under US control, blaming eight more >important political failures on the Iraqi puppet government in charge of >little more than cleaning daily rubble and dead bodies off streets. He >added results to date are a mixed bag and overall it's too early to pass >judgment - after over four disastrous years of failure and a conflict >longer in duration than WW II when war raged on three continents against >formidable enemies, and it was no simple task beating them. > >It again proves this man is unchallenged as a world champion serial liar. >By now, he may believe some of his own lies the way writer Alex Cockburn >said Ronald Reagan believed his. " Truth (for the great fabricator) was >what he happened to be saying at the time. He (and Bush) went one better >than George Washington in that he couldn't tell a lie and he couldn't tell >the truth, since he couldn't tell the difference between the two. " > >There is a difference, however, between the two deceivers. During his >first term at least, Reagan (as a former actor, albeit a B-rated one) did >a reasonable job impersonating a president. He could find his " mark " and >read his lines. George Bush never rose to that level even as Texas >governor or any other time in his life, and when it comes to lying, he >can't stop doing it even when he knows the difference. He proved it July >12 in his ludicrous portrayal of the true state of things in Iraq. It's >part of his desperate effort for new congressional funding in even greater >amounts. To get it, he ignores growing public disenchantment and deep >revulsion about a criminal lost cause enterprise launched and continued on >the basis of lies. > >That notwithstanding, Reid and other Democrats have their grandiose >notions of mission shift. It's to avoid " a precipitous withdrawal from >Iraq " with legislation he'll propose calling for permanent occupation >forces on the ground for the spurious notion of " conduct(ing) >counterterrorism operations, protect(ing) our assets (meaning oil) and >train(ing) Iraqi forces. " Senate Armed Services Committee chairman, Carl >Levin is on board with him. He'll support a limited troop withdrawal by >late year, an end to combat operations on the ground by April 30, 2008 >with Iraqi forces taking over, and a large remaining permanent occupation >force hunkered down inside fortified super-bases. Never mind what Iraqis >want that excludes our presence in their country. And the same is true for >the Afghans. > >Voices from the administration, Pentagon, Congress and the dominant media >assure they'll be disappointed as the top goal is salvaging America's >imperial adventurism and mission shifting current operations into a >workable permanent occupation. Here's why. The Afghan and Iraq wars are >for resources, primarily oil, and in the parts of the world where more >than four-fifths of proved reserves are located. Canadian journalist and >author Linda McQuaig explains the grandest of grand prizes is " hidden in >plain sight " in Iraq. It's the country's oil treasure - the planet's last >remaining bonanza of easily harvested " low-hanging fruit " with more >potential reserves than Saudi Arabia, the great majority of them untapped. > >It makes the country " the most sought after real estate on the face of the >earth " according to one Wall Street oil analyst she quoted. Even with >dated information on its potential, it's known Iraq has at least 10% of >dwindling world reserves. But it's potential was " frozen in time " with no >new development in over two decades because of intervening wars in the >1980s, economic sanctions following the Gulf war in 1991, and the current >war ongoing since March, 2003. If the country's potential doubles or >triples, as Saudi Arabia's did in the last 20 years, it would, in fact, >have the world's largest (mostly untapped) proved reserves making Iraq too >rich a prize for America and its Big Oil allies to pass up. It's worth >trillions of dollars and immense geopolitical power at a time of peak oil >in the face of future dwindling supplies, except in this resource-rich >country the US won't ever leave as long as there's enough of them in the >ground and region to justify staying. > >It's why the country is being turned into a giant permanent military base >protecting the ocean of oil beneath it Washington intends to control for >its Big Oil friends and to have veto power over who gets it, who doesn't, >and at what price. To understand what's happening, consider Korea. The US >arrived in the country in 1950 following Harry Truman's committing >American forces to help the South after Washington's instigated civil war >began there on June 25 that year. Fifty-seven years later, around 37,000 >troops still remain with no intention to leave. Washington has the same >thing in mind for Iraq. The Pentagon set up shop there and intends to stay. > >Below is shown, as best we know, how far advanced we've come toward >militarizing the country for permanent occupation no matter how debate >plays out in Congress. It's all bluster providing cover for administration >policy both parties support. > >Plan Iraq - Permanent Occupation > >Drawdowns, withdrawal, timelines, mission shifting, building democracy and >all the other current and long-standing phony rhetoric aside, America is >in Iraq to stay as a conqueror and occupier - that is, until Iraqis >finally kick us out as they will in time in a part of the world long a >graveyard for foreign invaders. But it won't happen quickly or before >countless more thousands die, are injured, suffer immeasurably, are >displaced, and lose everything. This is the ugly dark side of imperialism, >nurtured on conquest, unchallengeable control, and keenly focused on >destroying and permanently occupying the cradle of civilization now >smashed and planned for dismemberment. > >In the meantime, a new " peace candidate " will become president in January, >2009 on the strength of distant echos of Richard Nixon's " peace with >honor " 1968 campaign and hopes history would call him a " peacemaker. " >Instead, there were five and one-half more years of intense war, thousands >more American deaths, and one to two million more Southeast Asian victims >in Vietnam and the secret wars in Cambodia and Laos. > >Whatever little, if anything, a new president does at home, the occupation >of Iraq and Afghanistan will remain with plans for Iraqi forces eventually >to do most of our killing and dying for us. If or when they're up to it, >the scheme involves US troops staying hunkered down inside their >super-bases, used as needed outside them, with massive air power deployed >freely to slaughter innocent victims on the ground whenever they resist >what no one should ever have to endure. For now, Iraqis have no choice but >to bear up and fight back because it's their misfortune to have an ocean >of " our " oil beneath their sand we laid claim to. > >Already discussed is Iraq's importance as the planet's last remaining > " low-hanging fruit " bonanza of mostly untapped oil riches worth trillions >of dollars as the key reason America came to stay. The US military arrived >in March, 2003 and dug in for the long haul with fixed military >installations around the country. Dick Cheney's former employer, >Halliburton, got most of the huge no-bid contracts, worth many billions, >to war-profiteer and build them, irrespective of its outlandish record of >waste, fraud and abuse. > >As of May, 2005, US forces were operating out of 106 bases around the >country from an original estimated 120 sites. They range in size from the >huge Main Operating Base (MOB) Camp Victory complex near Baghdad airport >where thousands of American troops are stationed to smaller ones known as >Forward Operation Sites (FOS) that are still major installations. In >addition, there are many Cooperative Security Locations (CSL) that are >small outposts for as few as 500 personnel, a number of prisons and >detention facilities, and an original dozen sites given to Iraqi military >or police units that now likely number many more. > >Reports vary, and much remains secret, about the administration and >Pentagon's current and future construction plans for Iraq. What is known >is $18 billion earlier was allocated for in-country work that includes >base installations, the US Embassy and whatever other occupation >facilities are intended. The current figure is likely much higher. It's >also known US engineers are focusing on building 14 large " enduring bases " >for extended encampments for the tens of thousands of US forces there now >and future replacements. > >Professor Emeritus Jules Dufour of the University of Quebec, Canada >discussed " The Worldwide Network of US Military Bases " in his July 1, 2007 >article posted on Global Research.ca. It included detailed information >plus maps and much more on what he called " the Worldwide development of US >military power (in place) to view the (entire) Earth surface as a vast >territory to conquer, occupy and exploit (for giant US corporate behemoths >it's in league with). " He characterizes the scheme as a process of > " Humanity....being controlled and enslaved by this Network of US military >bases. " He and Chalmers Johnson believe they number 1000 or more that, >according to Johnson, were in 153 countries as of September, 2001 and now >likely in 160 or more. There are also many other secret, espionage, and >other bases jointly used in many countries with their hosts. > >Dufour says post-9/11, the US built 14 new bases in the Persian Gulf >region. It's also involved " in construction and/or reinforcement of 20 >bases (106 structured units as a whole) in Iraq " plus others in >Afghanistan and other Central Asian former Soviet bloc countries and >elsewhere to encircle and control both regions' strategic resources, >mainly oil, and the pipeline routes needed to transport it. > >Iraq bases are located or are being built around Baghdad, Mosul, Taji, >Balad, Kirkuk, Nasiriyah, Tikrit, Fallujah and Irbil. There are also plans >to rebuild and improve Baghdad, Mosul and other airfields as well as >rebuild roads and other essential infrastructure strategically needed for >occupation. There are no plans to help the Iraqi people left on their own. >They have the barest of essential services, and infrastructure to provide >them, like functioning hospitals, medications, electricity, clean water, >safe food to eat, fuel, schools, and most everything else. > >Most important for the planned long haul will be four to six or more >super-sized bases on the order of small towns with their own neighborhoods >and kinds of amenities found in typical US ones. Inside them, it's hard >distinguishing between Iraq and America unless more sophisticated and >better aimed rocket and mortar rounds strike nearby that's becoming more >common. > >The biggest of these bases so far is the huge Balad one. It houses the >major Air Force operation in the country, including its new spacious, >state of the art, " Kingpin " air traffic control center dividing the >country's airspace into " kill boxes, " called the Common Grid Reference >System. The largest Army logistical support center is here as well, and >it's also where thousands of civilian contractors, in neighborhoods known >as " KBR-land, " are based with all the comforts of home for them and >military personnel when it's quiet inside. The so-called secret Combined >Joint Special Operations Task Force (CJSOTF) is also at Balad. It's kept >behind " especially high walls " for privacy and seclusive separation from >other operations based there. > >The al-Asad airbase is the largest marine encampment in the country >located in western Anbar province where resistance to US occupying forces >has been stiffest. It, too, has a hometown feel with similar amenities to >the country's other major bases intended to be permanent. While the >Pentagon won't admit it, four super-bases were operating last year with >plans likely for at least two more. In addition, it was planned, but now >not certain, that British forces would maintain a permanent military >presence in the south around Basra where it's now based. If Britain pulls >out, as its public demands, the Pentagon will move in and likely expand >the facilities with at least another super-sized one for that >strategically oil-rich part of the country. They'll need it as the Brits >are no more in control there than US forces anywhere else. Their 2006 >Operation Sinbad flopped with militias on the ground in full control. > >Nonetheless, America came to Iraq to stay as long as the Middle East is >resource-rich and the greatest untapped portion by far is in Iraq. But >history shows the best-laid plans don't always work out as intended. >Occupiers aren't welcome anywhere with Iraq and Afghanistan particularly >adept at expelling earlier ones that tried and failed, including the >British from both countries who should know better. Journalist Felicity >Arbuthnot notes on Global Research.ca July 14 that on this day in 1958, > " the Iraqi army toppled the British (post WW I-imposed) royal regime, >which had opened the door wide for Western monopolies to plunder the >country's oil wealth under unjust concession. " Her message to modern-day >plunderers: " Listen to history. " > >Permanency may only be in the eyes of the beholder and may end much sooner >than planned. Our super-bases, with all their size, security and comforts >of home, may become no more permanent than their mega-predecessors in >Danang, Cam Rahn Bay and the Saigon embassy (a miniature compared to the >Vatican-sized behemoth in Baghdad's Green Zone) where the last remnants of >US presence in Vietnam were helicoptered from its rooftop in defeat and >humiliation. It forced us to give up what we intending keeping >unchallenged with visions as conquerors no different than today. > >In the end, we abandoned them because we were beaten and had no other >choice. What a determined third-world Asian country did 30 years ago to >the world's strongest superpower, Middle East and Central Asian ones are >doing today to the only remaining one slipping fast and running out of >excuses why. > >It's just a matter of time before history repeats with the same result. >Iraqis and Afghans believe it and intend to prove it again. Too bad >Washington hard-liners know little history and haven't figured it out. One >day they will. They're just slow to catch on. Ruling empires never see the >tide turning and that they're swimming against it. George Bush's America >is no different. It bit off more than it can swallow and will end the same >as others wrecked on the shoals of their own hubris. > >The scene is playing out in the graveyard of other imperial powers in the >Middle East and Central Asia. It just remains for the final chapter to be >written ending rest in peace unless Americans locate their cajones and >write their own version first. It has to reject corrupted power politics; >remove the criminal class; restore the rule of law; place the rights of >humanity and democratic values above wealth and privilege; and end forever >the hellish wars fought for them. > >Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at >lendmanstephen. > >Also visit his blog site at www.sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to The >Steve Lendman News and Information Hour on www.TheMicroEffect.com Saturdays ****** Kraig and Shirley Carroll ... in the woods of SE Kentucky http://www.thehavens.com/ thehavens 606-376-3363 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.859 / Virus Database: 585 - Release 2/14/05 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.