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
It's the Founders' Remedy for high crimes and misdemeanors.
It's never too late to protect the Constitution.
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.
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.
Americans read this truth only in blogs ... the Traditional Media are oblivious or in denial.
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.
America won't be leaving Iraq anytime soon. Not with oil at today's prices.
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".
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.