New White House plan: Keep US troops in Iraq permanently

[Aptrgangr]

New White House plan: Keep US troops in Iraq permanently

Permanent bases will damage America's image in the Middle East.

Washington - President Bush used to be fond of saying that American troops would stay in Iraq as long as needed and not a day longer. He isn't saying that anymore.

The new word from the White House is that American troops would be stationed in Iraq permanently on the "Korean model." The analogy is a little strained. The United States has helped to mend the rift between North and South Korea since 1953. But South Korea has had no internal insurgency to worry about.

The plan for permanent bases in Iraq must have been long in the making. The president ignored a recommendation of the Baker-Hamilton Commission that he state that America seeks no permanent bases in Iraq. At one point last year, the Senate and House passed an amendment to the military-spending bill banning the establishment of permanent bases in Iraq. The bill went to conference and then the ban on bases, adopted by both chambers, mysteriously disappeared.

The building of four bases along with a gigantic new American embassy in the Green Zone on the Tigris River has been moving along rapidly. The bases will have runways two miles long to accommodate the largest American planes. The Balad base north of Baghdad covers 14 square miles. Another base is planned for the area that was ancient Babylon.

The new embassy, which will be the largest American mission in the world, will be complete with swimming pool and commissary. Retired General Anthony Zinni has said that permanent bases are "a stupid idea." He said that they will damage America's image in the whole region.

These huge installations must be intended for more than Iraqi stabilization. Former President Jimmy Carter said in a speech in February of last year that "the reason we went into Iraq was to establish a permanent military base in the Gulf region." And few are missing the point that bases in Iraq will keep American might on Iran's doorstep.

• Daniel Schorr is a senior news analyst at National Public Radio.

New White House plan: Keep US troops in Iraq permanently. | csmonitor.com


This is a bad new plan...

[Crvena zvezda]

Originally Posted by Aptrgangr

This is a bad new plan...

This can be expected. Rarely have U.S. troops left a country where their troops entered and even after they left there was still a small U.S. military presence or subversive control of the countries military.

[wilpuri]

So, who's surprised?

[Red Skull]

Originally Posted by wilpuri

So, who's surprised?

I'm not. This was only a matter of time, really. Israel must feel very safe right now.

[Crvena zvezda]

Originally Posted by Red Skull

I'm not. This was only a matter of time, really. Israel must feel very safe right now.

If course they're happy. Saddan is basically the only Arab leader that actually seemed to be concerned with the plight of the Palestinians. The rest just use it for political purposes.

[FlashVoyager]

The US distrusts the Iraqi security forces, they assume half of them have connections to the rebels. The New Iraqi Army would have taken over if it wasn't for this distrust.

[wilpuri]

Well I read that the Americans are arming some of the Sunni militias in order to fight the Jihadists. Deja vú.

How long before Saddam v1.2 is in power with an American mandate?

[Errigal]

The remarkable thing about the Americans is they think it is for them alone to decide. I think the Iraqis making roadside bombs and shooting down helicopters get a vote in this too.

[Theobald]

Originally Posted by Red Skull

Israel must feel very safe right now.

I think that post-Iraq invasion Iran is far more dangerous for Israel than Iraq ever was, especially in 2003 when the baathist regime was nothing but an unfunny corrupted joke. Apart from giving money to families of suicide bombers and intifada victimes Saddam could not do much for Palestina.

Let's hope that this miscalculation will hasten the fall of the American Empire.

[Crvena zvezda]

Originally Posted by FlashVoyager

The US distrusts the Iraqi security forces, they assume half of them have connections to the rebels. The New Iraqi Army would have taken over if it wasn't for this distrust.

What do you expect. That Iraqi's (like Syrians) are the Arabs most likely to fight foreigners and the only ones not descendants of lazy goat hereders would greet the occupation of their land by idiotic foriegners. The simpel fact is that with the exception of Kurds who want an independent Kurdistan almost all Iraqi's hate the U.S. occupation except for exiles living abroad (kind of like the situation in Cuba).

[NatVox]

The U.S. launched a 10,000 troop offensive on the Province of Diyala just on Tuesday. The excuse for the attack was that the province had become a sancturary of Al-Qaeda..

Who brought Al-Qaeda in Iraq if it was not with Saddam Hussein?

US launches major offensive in Iraq | New York Times Video

[Crvena zvezda]

Originally Posted by Theobald

I think that post-Iraq invasion Iran is far more dangerous for Israel than Iraq ever was, especially in 2003 when the baathist regime was nothing but an unfunny corrupted joke. Apart from giving money to families of suicide bombers and intifada victimes Saddam could not do much for Palestina.

Let's hope that this miscalculation will hasten the fall of the American Empire.

Israel must feel safe. It now has an air corridor as reported by some media to bomb Iran. It can easily violate the airspace of Jordan undetected and with the U.S. in control of Iraqi Airspace Israel can do something like in the 1980s when it bombed Iraq's sole nucelar reactor.

[Crvena zvezda]

Originally Posted by Theobald

I think that post-Iraq invasion Iran is far more dangerous for Israel than Iraq ever was, especially in 2003 when the baathist regime was nothing but an unfunny corrupted joke. Apart from giving money to families of suicide bombers and intifada victimes Saddam could not do much for Palestina.

Let's hope that this miscalculation will hasten the fall of the American Empire.

Post-Gulf War Iraq was a threat and the threats it made were jokes. After the First Gulf War Iraq became a county who could only use it's airforce in 1/3rd of it's airspace due to illegal U.S. imposed no-fly zones, there was almost daily bombing of Iraq in u.s. enforcement of the no-fly zones, it's airforce was entirely gone with most of it's planes stuck in Syria and Iran, a country whose international botrders were closed, had hostile U.S. forces on two sides, other hostile forces on other boundaries, under immense international sanctions (Iraq was not allowed to import simple medicine or even pencils), a country that couldn't import parts needed for it's oil industry and a countery whose oil was under UN administration (also it was notoriously corrupt and 25% of the money went to Kuwait as "reparation") and facing rebellions from Kurds and Shiites.

Basically after the first gulf war Iraq fell from a military superpower in the middle east to a pathetic joke with a leader whp had big ambitions but whose actual power was pathetic.

[Crvena zvezda]

Report: Israel prepares for possible Iran strike22 June 2007 | 14:55 | Source: Jerusalem Post JERUSALEM -- The Israeli Air Force has been training in preparation for potential strikes against Iranian nuclear targets.

The long-range flights training program has been taking place for some time but has only been released for publication Friday, the Ma'ariv daily reported.

Intelligence assessments received by the Israeli defense establishment concur that once Iran passes the point of no return in its nuclear efforts, the entire Middle East will enter a frantic nuclear armament race, the Jerusalem Post reported.

Egypt and Saudi Arabia are expected to lead such an armament race.

At the end of 2007 the US and Israel are expected to hold a joint assessment to ascertain the influence of economic sanctions against Iran.

A new package of upgraded sanctions prepared jointly by Israel and the US, includes exerting pressure on European governments to cancel US$ 22bn in loan guarantees given annually to European companies trading with Iran.

The new package also includes sanctions against banks working with Iran, non-renewal of oil infrastructure in Iran and a long series of economic actions that are meant to seriously hurt the Iranian economy.

Following the end-of-year assessment, Washington will decide how to move forward in the struggle against Iran's nuclear race.

Members of the international community - the US and Israel leading - are convinced that Iran's race to enrich uranium is aimed at producing nuclear weapons. The Islamic Republic, on its side, insists it is looking for energy sources that would be an alternative to fossil fuels.

Iran has so far remained defiant in face of the demands voiced by the international community that it make its nuclear program transparent to UN-mandated monitoring.