 |
|||
|
|
|
 Withdrawal From Iraq? Not With All These Shiny U.S. Bases…Posted on Feb 24, 2006TomDispatch.com: We’re in a new period in the war in Iraq—one that brings to mind the Nixonian era of “Vietnamization”: A President presiding over an increasingly unpopular war that won’t end; an election bearing down; the need to placate a restive American public; and an army under so much strain that it seems to be running off the rails. So it’s not surprising that the media is now reporting on administration plans for, or “speculation” about, or “signs of,” or “hints” of “major draw-downs” or withdrawals of American troops. The figure regularly cited these days is less than 100,000 troops in Iraq by the end of 2006. With about 136,000 American troops there now, that figure would represent just over one-quarter of all in-country U.S. forces, which means, of course, that the term “major” certainly rests in the eye of the beholder. In addition, these withdrawals are—we know this thanks to a Seymour Hersh piece, Up in the Air, in the December 5th New Yorker—to be accompanied, as in South Vietnam in the Nixon era, by an unleashing of the U.S. Air Force. The added air power is meant to compensate for any lost punch on the ground (and will undoubtedly lead to more “collateral damage”—that is, Iraqi deaths). Advertisement Previous item: Inching Toward Authoritarianism Next item: UAE Gave $100 Million for Katrina Relief CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment |
Acts of Love
Email
Print
Share
Digg
Facebook
TwitThis
StumbleUpon
Reddit
YahooBuzz
Email
BlinkList
del.icio.us
Fark
Furl
Google
LinkedIn
Mixx
MyShare
NewsVine
Propeller
SphereIt
Technorati
YahooMyWeb
Newsletter 
Become a Fan
Follow Us
Subscribe
Tags|Bazaar|Podcast|About Us|Contact Us|User Agreement|Privacy Policy|FAQ: Comments and Moderation
Copyright © 2012 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved.
By refusedig, February 25, 2006 at 3:36 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
There are already big oil contracts in place for control of Iraqi oil, I would assume including oil companies other than U.S. Now that we (and, by extension, the rest of the oil-hungry world) are there, neither Republicans nor Democrats will let us leave—not until our civilization no longer needs oil. If the American people want us out, their political recourse, sad to say, will have to come from outside the mainstream of U.S. political action.
The rest of the world is content to let Americans bleed and die for it, and the various U.S. corporatist propaganda machines are working non-stop to make enough of the American people feel OK about it that we can stay in Iraq.
Maybe they are wrong. Maybe the American people will force a withdrawal, but it is a gamble that Corporate America (which includes the U.S. Government), I am sure, feel forced to take.
Report thisBy spiiderweb, February 25, 2006 at 7:24 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
I blogged this back on the 15th. It was particulary upsetting that reporters know they can’t submit a story including any combination of the words “permanent”, “bases” and “iraq”.
http://spiiderweb.blogspot.com/2006/02/permantent-bases-in-iraq.html
Its very clear we’re not going to leave Iraq.
Report this