We have all heard it now. The mid-term election is about Iraq. Not the economy, not gay marriage and not stem cell research. We have yet to learn what exit strategy the Bush administration is working on. Apparently two weeks ago, while talking to reporters, Bush casually mentioned permanent bases in Iraq. It is not the first time this came up. I have no doubt that this administration has no exit strategy, because they never meant to leave Iraq. Why should they? Just look at the profit posted by Halliburton since we entered this conflict. Below is an enlightening article about what America's real role in Iraq is.
US and UK forces establish 'enduring bases' in Iraq ( from The Independent www.independent.co.uk)
Despite talk of withdrawal 'when the job is done', there are signs that coalition troops will be there for the long term
By Andrew Buncombe in Washington
Published: 02 April 2006
The Pentagon has revealed that coalition forces are spending millions of dollars establishing at least six "enduring" bases in Iraq - raising the prospect that US and UK forces could be involved in a long-term deployment in the country. It said it assumed British troops would operate one of the bases.
Almost ever since President Bush claimed an end to "major combat operations" in Iraq on 1 May 2003, debate has focused on how quickly troops could be withdrawn. The US and British governments say troops will remain in Iraq "until the job is done". Yet while the withdrawal of a substantial number of troops remains an aim, it has become increasingly clear that the Pentagon and the Ministry of Defence (MoD) are preparing to retain some forces in Iraq for the longer term.
0 comments:
Post a Comment