Someone should tell McCain; colonialism is dead
By Tom Maertens
from The Mankato Free Press
The Iraqi government recently rejected U.S. proposals to establish 58 permanent military bases and extend the American occupation indefinitely. The proposals would also have given the U.S authority to conduct military operations, control Iraqi airspace, arrest Iraqi citizens, and determine whether another country’s actions constitute aggression. In short, to establish sovereignty.
Some Iraqis think the United States would use that authority to engineer an attack on Iran. Both leading Shiite parties rejected Bush’s plan. A senior Shia politician close to Prime Minister al-Maliki told The Washington Post: “The Americans are making demands that would lead to the colonization of Iraq.”
John McCain is part of the problem. His statement that U.S. troops might stay in Iraq for 100 years confirms American intentions. McCain later claimed that U.S troops would stay only under peaceful conditions, but why are troops necessary if there is no fighting? The war, after all, including lifetime care for injured veterans, is costing the U.S. $25 billion per month.
He compounded the problem when asked if he knew when American troops could start returning home. He replied: “No, but that’s not too important. What’s important is the casualties in Iraq.” When McCain says he will never “surrender” he obviously means “withdraw.” We can’t leave when we are taking casualties and we won’t leave when we are not. He can’t define victory so he argues for staying indefinitely.
Permanent occupation would trigger a revolt, insuring more casualties. In fact, Moqtada al-Sadr recently announced his militia would resume fighting against U.S. forces. Colonialism has been dead for a hundred years. Someone should break the news to McCain.
from The Mankato Free Press
The Iraqi government recently rejected U.S. proposals to establish 58 permanent military bases and extend the American occupation indefinitely. The proposals would also have given the U.S authority to conduct military operations, control Iraqi airspace, arrest Iraqi citizens, and determine whether another country’s actions constitute aggression. In short, to establish sovereignty.
Some Iraqis think the United States would use that authority to engineer an attack on Iran. Both leading Shiite parties rejected Bush’s plan. A senior Shia politician close to Prime Minister al-Maliki told The Washington Post: “The Americans are making demands that would lead to the colonization of Iraq.”
John McCain is part of the problem. His statement that U.S. troops might stay in Iraq for 100 years confirms American intentions. McCain later claimed that U.S troops would stay only under peaceful conditions, but why are troops necessary if there is no fighting? The war, after all, including lifetime care for injured veterans, is costing the U.S. $25 billion per month.
He compounded the problem when asked if he knew when American troops could start returning home. He replied: “No, but that’s not too important. What’s important is the casualties in Iraq.” When McCain says he will never “surrender” he obviously means “withdraw.” We can’t leave when we are taking casualties and we won’t leave when we are not. He can’t define victory so he argues for staying indefinitely.
Permanent occupation would trigger a revolt, insuring more casualties. In fact, Moqtada al-Sadr recently announced his militia would resume fighting against U.S. forces. Colonialism has been dead for a hundred years. Someone should break the news to McCain.
Powered by Blogger
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home