Bush Reveals True Reason for War in Push for Iraqi Agreement

For five years the Bush administration has played wack-a-mole with the American people as to why we are in Iraq, with a new justification quickly spawning after the hollow core of the prior position was exposed. WMD's was followed by fighting Al Qaeda and ultimately bringing democracy to the Middle East. Last week the proverbial mole may have met his maker and exposed the true reason over a million Americans have been put in harm's way.

In May 2004, President Bush explained that our mission in Iraq was "to see the Iraqi people in charge of Iraq for the first time in generations." A week into his second term, Bush said he would "absolutely" honor any request for withdrawal of U.S. troops by a sovereign Iraqi government, only to then ignore multiple request over the next three years and polls showing near unanimous support among Iraqi's for a timeline for withdrawal.

All this was laid bare this month as the Iraqi government went on the offensive in its call for U.S. withdrawal by 2010. Far from embracing the desires of a sovereign Iraq, the White House instead feebly attempted to claim Prime Minister Maliki's statement was mistranslated, while the McCain camp argued that Iraqi's really want the U.S. to stay until 2020. Apparently their view of a "free Iraq" is an Iraq that is free to do what we tell them to do.

The Iraqi demand for a deadline for withdrawal of U.S. troops comes in the context of ongoing negotiations with the U.S. over a Status of Forces (SoF) Agreement in which the White House is seeking to define its legacy through (i) an indefinite occupation; (ii) more than 50 permanent bases (including five mega-bases); (iii) the unlimited ability to pursue the "war on terror" in Iraq (including ability to arrest Iraqis without consulting government); (iv) control of Iraqi airspace below 29,000 feet; (v) supervision of Iraq's defense, interior and national security ministries for ten years; and (vi) immunity for U.S. forces and contractors. In addition, the U.S. wants the right to unilaterally determine whether an act by another country (i.e., Iran) constitutes a "threat" to Iraq and respond as it deems fit in order to "protect" Iraq.

The Iraqi's have rejected this invitation to be an American colony as "arrogant" and an affront to their sovereignty, but the White House is playing hardball and recently cost the Iraqi's $5 billion by blocking the transfer of certain Iraqi currency reserves out of the declining dollar.

From the start of the occupation, the Bush administration has shown little regard for Iraqi sovereignty and international legal prohibitions against making significant changes to the legal and political institutions of an occupied country. Instead, the administration pursued what, former World Bank chief economist Joseph Stiglitz characterized as "an even more radical form of shock therapy than pursued in the former Soviet world," as it completely reshaped Iraq's legal and economic regime to turn it into a Club Med for corporate interests.

The shock therapy was administered by Paul Bremer, who headed the Coalition Provisional Authority, through 100 separate Orders which suspended all tariffs and import fees (Order 12); immunized foreign contractors (Order 17); calls for the sale of 200 state owned enterprises through 40-year ownership licenses (Order 39); allowed foreign corporations to fully own Iraqi businesses and remove profits tax free (Order 39); cut corporate income taxes by two-thirds through a 15 percent flat tax (Order 49) and even restricts Iraqi farmers from using certain seeds without paying a license fee to seed suppliers such as Monsanto (Order 81).

The Bush administration also has ignored Congressional restrictions on the use of government funds "to exercise United States control over the oil infrastructure or oil resources of Iraq," as the State Department recently assisted the Big 5 oil companies in winning rights to develop some of Iraq's largest oilfields. Soon they will join Halliburton and others who have made billions off the war while protected by our troops.

The current spat over the SoF Agreement once again raises the question of why we fought this war to begin with. After five years of war at a cost of approximately $539 billion, 90,000 Iraqi lives, over 35,000 American soldiers wounded or killed, we now know what we suspected all along -- that Operation Iraqi Freedom was never about liberating the people of Iraq but instead about liberating its assets for foreign exploitation. Naomi Klein was right four years ago when she described the Bush mission as "pillaging Iraq in pursuit of a neocon utopia."

That is why with or without the SoF Agreement, Bush's legacy is secure. The hollow echo of Operation Iraqi Freedom reminds us that while other presidents may have failed the American people in one way or another, no president has failed, deceived or betrayed the American people like George W. Bush.

Follow Bennet Kelley on Twitter: www.twitter.com/surfdc

Comments

[MaryfromMontcoPA]

impeach.

It's the Founders' Remedy for high crimes and misdemeanors.

It's never too late to protect the Constitution.

[dadw5boys]

Everyone screams it was all about oil.

But there is one other thing envoluved here too,

The Musliums do not charge INTEREST on loans, remember Jesus threw out the money lenders.

Well Imagine all those millions of people with credit cards that collected high interest. As you see the Forgien Businessmen have more rights in Iraq than the Iraqi Citizens.

[bayside]

Does everyone know bush has not told us one truth in all his time in the white house, so ask yourself what does he want. He wants amero, he wants middle east oil, we have tons of it in alaska that havent been tapped yet, he wants corn ethonol when europe has water and air cars....he seems to be delibertley killng the dollar, and us...Not a nice man....

[Sundialsvc4]

Why do you "roll over and play dead" at the end of this piece and proclaim blandly that "Bush is secure in his legacy?"

This is high treason. Over 125,000 people (more than 1/3 of them American) have been killed ... or "worse, much worse." The $500-billion price tag is only a drop in the bucket.

I really don't care who a man (or woman) is; or what office they hold. Under the very same International law that the United States of America --created-- in 1945, Bush and many others would hang. And, they richly deserve to.

The devastation that these men and women have inflicted upon their --own-- nation is a crime unto itself, but far worse will happen if we allow these crimes to go unpunished; to be "ratified" as "legacy." It will only get worse... much worse.

"World War Episode Three: The Return of the Nukes." It's not far away, ladies and gents. Many generations before our own have stuffed their heads in the sand and allowed high-criminals to have their way. And perished for it.

[ddjango]

"Apparently their view of a 'free Iraq' is an Iraq that is free to do what we tell them to do." In the US, their view of the people is that we're free to express our opinions, then be ignored and/or surveiled and/or put on the terrorist watch list.

[Cathexis]

And yet ...

Americans read this truth only in blogs ... the Traditional Media are oblivious or in denial.

[Insearchoftruth]

Misappropriation of $500 Bil , losing precious lives, ruining the economy, plus aiding and abetting the enemy in the name of profit for a few friends. Why is this not treason?

[osage]

Neocon imperialis­m/exploita­tion was the motive, but committing war crimes was the means. Going to war under false pretenses, lying to the American congress and the American people, destroying a country and getting thousands and thousands of innocent human beings killed for no legitimate reason other than you wanted to is a war crime or at least treasonous. Bush wasn't asked by anyone representing Iraq to invade and occupy their country. There were many experts in the military, in congress and in the international community who opposed the invasion of Iraq for a multitude of reasons. They were more right than even they knew at the time. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice are all guilty of war crimes and should be held accountable for the death and destruction they deviously conspired to perpetrate. They are mass murderers.

[robertogt]

"to see the Iraqi people in charge of Iraq for the first time in generations" per Bush. Would that be similiar to the way Americans are in charge of America? How long does Bush think he can pee down our backs and convince us it's raining? Note to author: Check the Johns Hopkins/Lancet study. There are over a million dead Iraqis. Not to mention the casualties on both sides from depleted uranium.(DU). All the Iraqis have to do is hold on a little longer. When the troops checks don't clear because we have no credit left, we will leave. Remember guns/butter economics? Well it's about to come home to roost.

[loslobo]

It has always been about oil and empire.

The real questions should be how in hell is America blind to the fact that Cheney and Company attacked their own, to enrich himself and friends.

[cunuck]

Most of the world knew this. Don't you remember at the run-up to the war there were millions protesting with signs "No Blood for Oil"? It was discussed in most of the foreign press and TV as well as on the PBS stations in the US.

America won't be leaving Iraq anytime soon. Not with oil at today's prices.

[Erdgeist]

What is frightening is that this same "shock therapy" is being applied to the U.S. so we can have a corporatist state with the commons completely privatized.

[DAE]

In times gone by this was called "Yanqui Imperialism". Its nothing new. We've been doing it in Latin America for a century and a half and throughout much of the rest of the world ever since the end of WW II. It's just that for any casual observer it's even more blatant and transparent in Iraq.

[Majus]

The one thing I currently dislike most about GWB is that when he retires in January he will be living in the Dallas area, in the monied enclave of Highland Park.

It seems that those with the most money think nothing of allowing someone of his stature to live amongst them.

Birds of a feather, I guess, is the rule here but I still wish someone had spoken up and told him "not in my neighborhood".

[cunuck]

That's Bush's base - "The haves and the have-mores­".........­....

[don]

They'll chase him out once he starts flying his helicopter in and out like they did Ross Perot.

[TimeJumper]

Your commentary is a sad but very accurate observation about this president, his administration and his policies. We have allowed this president to pursue his own agenda with little regard for the Rule of Law, the Constitution or the American people.
Have we as Americans forgotten that we are a participatory democracy? Countries that do not comprehend our democracy refer to our president as a “ruler”. They fail to grasp the concept that our president and our government are accountable to its citizenry and not the other way around. However, I am somewhat surprised and disappointed that my fellow citizens have not taken to task to hold this president and his administration accountable for its extreme transgressions, incompetency and conflicting interests.
So it becomes somewhat difficult to defend our ideals, our government and our society when we ourselves ignore the accountability of our elected officials. It is somewhat contradictory, if not hypocritical to expect emerging democracies to use our American template; especially if we are apathetic in regard to preserving our own democratic ideals and principles at home.

[grannysharp]

they should have left the name of this war "Operation Iraq Liberation" and the letters would spell out the real reason for it O.I.L.. one can only hope the Bush and his goons get whats coming to them and I don't mean money, they have already collected that.