Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

HEADS UP: Two hugely important parts of this ISG report

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 02:16 PM
Original message
HEADS UP: Two hugely important parts of this ISG report
Edited on Wed Dec-06-06 02:43 PM by WilliamPitt
Bearing in mind that a) Bush & Co. went into Iraq looking to stay forever, and b) the oil was a major incentive, note the following:

RECOMMENDATION 22: The President should state that the United States does not seek permanent military bases in Iraq. If the Iraqi government were to request a temporary base or bases, then the U.S. government could consider that request as it would in the case of any other government.

RECOMMENDATION 23: The President should restate that the United States does not seek to control Iraq’s oil.

Page 61 here: http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/pdf/iraqReport_120606_part1and2.pdf

I wonder how this is going over at 1600 Pennsylvania.

NOTE: I am not endorsing this report in any way, nor do I think these two things will get anywhere with the Bush administration. It's important, imho, because it has finally been said out loud.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 02:17 PM
Response to Original message
1. Do you think...
this is going to make any sort of difference whatsoever?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 02:19 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. I doubt it
but it's out there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #3
13. So do I.
Which is why I don't think they're hugely important.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-07-06 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #1
45. I do - House of Saud laid down the law to Poppy Bush a few weeks ago and
I have no doubt they could care less if BushBOY is not happy. Bush1 and Baker will soften it imagewise for him as they can, but for the most part, I think Gates is in place to rein in Cheney and Bushboy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karlrschneider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 02:18 PM
Response to Original message
2. Is Cheney over at the WH today?
...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 02:20 PM
Response to Original message
4. I'm the decider!
And I choose not to hear a thing they said

I'm the decider....

In the best Bush Petulant style I could give you
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JeffR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #4
21. You forgot to add:
"Heh heh"

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donheld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-07-06 03:49 AM
Response to Reply #21
42. Are you talking about the president or
Beavis and Butthead. Oh wait, is there a difference? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 02:20 PM
Response to Original message
5. It's easy to "restate" but the proof is in the pudding...or oil
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wtmusic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #5
16. X-actly. What has Junior done lately to deserve all this trust? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goforit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #16
26. Well W is handicaped with a low IQ, I think it is the "Pitty" respect he's getting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hobbit709 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 02:21 PM
Response to Original message
6. I wonder how this is going over at 1600 Pennsylvania.
Actually, I wonder how it's going over at Cheney's undisclosed location.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shain from kane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 02:23 PM
Response to Original message
7. "The United States does not seek to control Iraq’s oil." (nudge, nudge, wink, wink).
There, it's been said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 02:24 PM
Response to Original message
8. Cheney can go now...his job is done...Pg 25.,.

U.S.-Led Reconstruction Efforts

The United States has appropriated a total of about $34 billion
to support the reconstruction of Iraq, of which about $21 billion
has been appropriated for the “Iraq Relief and Reconstruction
Fund.” Nearly $16 billion has been spent, and almost
all the funds have been committed. The administration requested
$1.6 billion for reconstruction in FY 2006, and received
$1.485 billion. The administration requested $750
million for FY 2007. The trend line for economic assistance in
FY 2008 also appears downward.

Congress has little appetite for appropriating more funds
for reconstruction. There is a substantial need for continued
reconstruction in Iraq, but serious questions remain about the
capacity of the U.S. and Iraqi governments.
The coordination of assistance programs by the Defense
Department, State Department, United States Agency for International
Development, and other agencies has been ineffective.
There are no clear lines establishing who is in charge of
reconstruction
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Botany Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 02:24 PM
Response to Original message
9. Sadly bush will pay no attention to these recommendations.
"They" already have set up a cover story because the I.S.G. report is
just one of "several reports that the President will look at."

I think part of H.W.'s breakdown came from the fact he knew that
W, would not follow the I.S.G.'s report.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nite Owl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 02:29 PM
Response to Original message
10. #23 the US does not seek to control
Iraq's oil

But didn't Bremmer make it that the oil had to be 'privatized'? No longer belonging to the people? So yes, it doesn' belong to the government of the US but it can still belong to Halliburtin and pals.
Maybe I missed it and when they drew up their constitution this was changed but I remember this being a part of the Bremmer plan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSparkle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 02:32 PM
Response to Original message
11. How far along are we on those permanent bases?
Hopefully the Iraqis will nonetheless find some use for them (maybe as schools/universities?).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
npincus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 02:34 PM
Response to Original message
12. #22 should be moved to the top of the list
isn't that the elephant in the room?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 02:36 PM
Response to Original message
14. Define "permanent"
I can hear the spin now. Actually no I can't because the MSM won't bring this up to save their lives. If they didn't read your book and mention it regularly now there is no way they are going to bring this up.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
central scrutinizer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 02:39 PM
Response to Original message
15. call me cynical, but
Edited on Wed Dec-06-06 02:39 PM by central scrutinizer
it simply says that the President should state such and such, not that those proposals shouldn't be carried out anyway by back door means, like the Iraqis "asking" us to stay or help them get their oil fields up and running again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
htuttle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 02:42 PM
Response to Original message
17. If they were serious, they would revoke all the privatization laws...
...enacted during Proconsul Bremer's reign, as described by Naomi Klein in her 2004 "Baghdad Year Zero":



That, in essence, was the working thesis in Iraq, and in keeping with the belief that private companies are more suited than governments for virtually every task, the White House decided to privatize the task of privatizing Iraq's state-dominated economy. Two months before the war began, USAID began drafting a work order, to be handed out to a private company, to oversee Iraq's “transition to a sustainable market-driven economic system.” The document states that the winning company (which turned out to be the KPMG offshoot Bearing Point) will take “appropriate advantage of the unique opportunity for rapid progress in this area presented by the current configuration of political circumstances.” Which is precisely what happened.

L. Paul Bremer, who led the U.S. occupation of Iraq from May 2, 2003, until he caught an early flight out of Baghdad on June 28, admits that when he arrived, “Baghdad was on fire, literally, as I drove in from the airport.” But before the fires from the “shock and awe” military onslaught were even extinguished, Bremer unleashed his shock therapy, pushing through more wrenching changes in one sweltering summer than the International Monetary Fund has managed to enact over three decades in Latin America. Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel laureate and former chief economist at the World Bank, describes Bremer's reforms as “an even more radical form of shock therapy than pursued in the former Soviet world.”

The tone of Bremer's tenure was set with his first major act on the job: he fired 500,000 state workers, most of them soldiers, but also doctors, nurses, teachers, publishers, and printers. Next, he flung open the country's borders to absolutely unrestricted imports: no tariffs, no duties, no inspections, no taxes. Iraq, Bremer declared two weeks after he arrived, was “open for business.”

One month later, Bremer unveiled the centerpiece of his reforms. Before the invasion, Iraq's non-oil-related economy had been dominated by 200 state-owned companies, which produced everything from cement to paper to washing machines. In June, Bremer flew to an economic summit in Jordan and announced that these firms would be privatized immediately. “Getting inefficient state enterprises into private hands,” he said, “is essential for Iraq's economic recovery.” It would be the largest state liquidation sale since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

http://www.harpers.org/BaghdadYearZero.html


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
catmandu57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 02:45 PM
Response to Original message
18. Who's got the picture of baker and cheney?
Someone posted it yesterday, It reminded me of Gandalf dressing down Saruman. I'd say that baker let dead eye know what was coming and gave him the news that he was on the way out. I look for dead eye to have some serious health issues soon, serious enough to make him retire.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laurab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #18
36. I agree, I think he's on the way out, too
health issues the obvious choice. It may be the only thing that comes out of this report, and probably not even the report, but poppy and friends. Then put McCain or some other bullshitter in there, and try to make the administration LOOK better in order to have a chance in '08.

I pray it doesn't work. I think the dems have enough footage of "maverick" mccain to bring him down a few notches, and the far right doesn't like him. I worry because so many out there still think he's "moderate". I hope the Democratic party is ready for mccain - they certainly should be. If not, maybe they could get Stephen Colbert to advise them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PVnRT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 02:45 PM
Response to Original message
19. isg rep statement doubleplus ungood minitruth rectify immediate
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jazzjunkysue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #19
33. You speak chimp quite well. n/t.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
htuttle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 09:28 PM
Response to Reply #19
34. times 6.12.06 isg statement malreported iraq refs crimethink rewrite fullwise
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 02:49 PM
Response to Original message
20. These are Poppy's boys.
Poppy is weeping. His boys are there to bail out Junior yet once again--they've been doing it for the Chimp's whole life.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Az Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 02:56 PM
Response to Original message
22. I suspect its a question of the motivation of the NeoCons
From my perspective NeoCons are more about manipulating public perception. The reason for going into Iraq had more to do with image than profit. The create the idea of the American Dynasty they needed to have a large scale triumph over a defined evil. And as Rummie said there were better targets in Iraq than in Afghanastan.

The attack on Iraq I suspect was more ideological than profiteering. This is not to say the profit did not play into the motivations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tatiana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 03:05 PM
Response to Original message
23. Wes Clark already said this. These people truly don't have an original though in their heads.
Before It's Too Late in Iraq

By Wesley K. Clark
Friday, August 26, 2005; A21

<snip>

The United States should tone down its raw rhetoric and instead listen more carefully to the many voices within the region. In addition, a public U.S. declaration forswearing permanent bases in Iraq would be a helpful step in engaging both regional and Iraqi support as we implement our plans.

(more...)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/25/AR2005082501623_pf.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-07-06 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #23
46. turn that embassy/monstrosity into a hospital.
turn the other bases into schools.
swords into plow shares.
stop right now. don't waste another penny. change the plans, and finish them in a way that benefits the FAMILIES in iraq. leave those pork projects, and the funds to finish them behind and get the hell out.
leave behind a symbol of peace and decency.
i am so glad this was mentioned in the report.
now just get out. get out fast. or more importantly, listen to the f***ing generals this time. get out the way they want to get out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 03:48 PM
Response to Original message
24. Having skimmed the document
I am drawing a perhaps premature conclusion that the ISG has essentially outlined a de-sovereignization of the Iraq government, essentially restoring an occupation authority, all cloaked in language that pretends that greater sovereignty and responsibility is being bestowed on Iraq. It's back to the CPA, under some new ill-defined international auspice, while the official Iraqi government puts its training pants back on.

What a load.

The other obvious point in their thick pile of bullshit is that the Democratic president will get stuck with the defeat post 1-20-09.

Fuck the ISG and the horse they rode in on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 05:08 PM
Response to Original message
25. Rec.#23-Should happen TODAY-bush: grave and deteriorating
how long do we have to PROP UP #41's Son?!! It's obvious Poppy can't even bail him out and he is still ungrateful!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goforit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 05:16 PM
Response to Original message
27. Do y' all think that this ISG report is as close to impeachment as one can get?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lone_Star_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 05:16 PM
Response to Original message
28. But is that anymore than lip service?
Words mean nothing. I felt that was more about simply changing the shade of lipstick on the pig.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 06:58 PM
Response to Original message
29. Will, we all know Bush would have no trouble saying those things
If he tought that there were some political advantage in it, he would tell us the earth is flat and keep a straight face.

He can say those things, but will he mean it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Schema Thing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 08:51 PM
Response to Original message
30. Two things Wes Clark has been saying for years, eh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nam78_two Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 09:06 PM
Response to Original message
31. K&R/nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hvn_nbr_2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 09:12 PM
Response to Original message
32. "The pResident should state..."
Oh, hell, he'll say anything, as long as it's not true. Recommending that Caligula the Lesser states something is akin to farting in a hurricane--both are essentially useless and with no discernible effect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jazzjunkysue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 09:31 PM
Response to Reply #32
35. Right. Puppets say what they're paid to say. Then you throw them a biscuit.
I can get my dog to nod yes when I ask her if she'll wash the dishes and put out the recycling, too. But so far, it hasn't happened yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #35
37. If this Commission would have recommended that
Bush and Cheney need to resign or be Impeached then I would have endorsed their stand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oasis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 10:58 PM
Response to Original message
38. "Iraq's oil"? Who are those ISG jokers trying to fool with their propaganda?
;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Morgana LaFey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 11:18 PM
Response to Original message
39. Isn't a wee bit too late on both?
Hasn't the oil basically been turned over to multinational corps that we gave it to? DOn't we already have several huge, state of the art bases?

I'm confused.

So saying it aloud does what, exactly, if doing so makes it appear that these things aren't already a fait accompli?

Like I said: I'm confused.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 11:24 PM
Response to Original message
40. Talk radio this afternoon pretty much said that
this administration could not admit that they aren't going to stay there forever like the bases and controlling the oil. However, my own opinion is that they can lie about it like they do about everything else that has brought us to this place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-07-06 12:17 AM
Response to Original message
41. What did they say about that obscene embassy? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
symbolman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-07-06 04:27 AM
Response to Original message
43. Real Cute coming from the guy who was
Inserted into Iraq for the "purpose" of getting other nations to 'forgive' Iraqi DEBT. Or has he been relieved from that job yet?

Which with Baker is code for SLICING UP THE OIL PIE with whoever deserves a piece of it, gotta be a good boy, and being a Saudi wouldn't hurt either :)

Anyone remember how sloppy they got when they had their new Toy to play with? I recall them saying, "Well, Gee willickers, if you frenchies aren't going to help up bake the bread, well then, you just won't GET any of it.." right out there in PUBLIC for Chrissakes, they were SO PROUD of their toy soldiers..

They were divvying that place up BEFORE they got there.

I wouldn't believe Baker if he said I had a Fence Post up my ass and I was having trouble sitting down.

Good Catch Will, but remember, it's all LIES of course. Our govt consists of nothing but PR WARS at this point, with a Media that has Round Heels for them.. wordsmithing is ALL.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-07-06 10:09 AM
Response to Original message
44. A US puppet regime will ask for anything
that the US wants it to ask for.

Like: US withdraws from Panama, Panama does away with its army, US "must" go back because Panama can no longer defend the Panama Canal.

Re controlling Iraq's oil: I doubt that "restating" will make a substantial difference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lizbitchwitchy Donating Member (90 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-07-06 05:09 PM
Response to Original message
47. This is ridiculous
I wonder if these participants in the study group actually studied the problems in Iraq. It seems to me that everyone else is to blame for the situation in Iraq except the US and the US military.

Well the problems begin with the widespread and increasing violence. Whose fault is that? Well it is the Arab- Sunni’s insurgency and the Shia militia groups fault. It is the fault of Al-Qaeda and the widespread criminality, of course. No mention of the US military or their shootings of wedding parties; torture policies and prison camps holding uncharged detainees who endure abuse; Not even any mention of that fact that violence started with the declaration of war – after all war is violent – and that was a decision that the US made.

It’s really going to be a disaster, they say, if we don’t do something immediately to squelch the problems and deter the situation from continuing on in the same direction (or another words staying the course). For God’s sake the probability of the outcomes are severe and they are as follows:
1. The breakdown of the Iraqi government
2. A humanitarian catastrophe
3. the intervention of neighboring countries
4. Sunni-Shia clashes spanning outward and globally
5. Al-Qaeda awarded a propaganda victory and expanding its base of operation
6. the deterioration of the US’s global standing
7. An American people even more polarized.
Act now – or these are the most likely outcome of a continued chaotic Iraq, they say. What a sense of urgency they portray and this list – Well God forbid.

God didn’t forbid, I got news for them. We already saw the breakdown of the Iraqi government when we overthrew Saddam. The world is a much better place without him, they say – but he is still in existence and there are many people in the world which would argue that Saddam leading Iraq has got to be better than the current situation. The only people you won’t hear argue that is those who overthrew him in the first place.

A humanitarian catastrophe is already at hand and it is more of a catastrophe and the impact more severe that the participants in this study group don’t realize it. When so many people have died in an unwarranted war and leaders of this war claiming to liberate them from tyranny – isn’t that already a catastrophe, humanitarian in nature? When most of the civilians in a country do not have their basic need met, wouldn’t that be considered a humanitarian crisis at least? And when ethnic cleansing is widespread and so many civilians are displaced, orphaned, injured, suffering – I would say we are not concerned at all about the humanitarian catastrophe resulting from the lack of response to this warning – but rather we are already there – despite their too late warning which says very little to begin with.

If the intervention of neighboring countries are a concern then why do they advocate that Syria and Iran form a support group to assist in the stabilizing of Iraq then? Isn’t that intervention? Well even so, no need to worry about that folks – Iran and Syria are all very concerned about an unstable Iraq and I’m sure it would please everyone in the middle east and especially the neighbors to have a stable iraq but it serves them better to have a busy US with exhausted resources focused on Iraq than to have a stable Iraq, trust me. There won't be any cooperation from iran and Syria trying to stabilize iraq so the American forces can regroup and find something else to do with the tax payers money and our military. They might be from the middle east, there study group but they aren't stupid. I think we have done ruined any chance of any of those countries coming to help us out of any mess we got ourselves into.

Oh and Al-Qaeda winning a propaganda victor – Lord say it isn’t so – The lord does not lie – and he says it is so – and it’s been so and with the way we operate it’s so ridiculous that they are saying that NOW we are concerned about Al-Qaeda expanding and looking better than we do. Imagine that – We went over to iraq to stop these bastards and look what we have done instead. Oh me oh my – does anyone just spit it out anymore – just say the truth – This wasn’t a fucking problem and now it is a problem and no urgent request and response for acting now is going to do much to change this problem. A day late and a dollar short.

And for Christ’s sake, people, we are talking about the good global standing of the US is at risk of diminishing – QUICK! Come together and support our war and our efforts to fix what everyone else has broken to save our name and good reputation. As if it can be saved. As if there is something to be saved. As if anyone reasons like apparently these scholar type study group participants do…like what? We all CAN go to hell longer – just like What? We can be even more hated amongst the global community than we already are? Is there a worse position than the MOST hated in the global community that we are working to fend off here?

News flash – diminishing is a typo – it should read diminished. Gone – Zip – nadda – NO good standing to speak of, save or even worry our propaganda filled little pretty heads about. The only way we can start and take those first steps toward a genuine effort to look credible to the most forgiving in our global community is to impeach the president - hold those people accountable that are to be held accountable for all the suffering, chaos, loss and blood shed and I don't see any recommendation for that at all. I must be way off here. I didn't study this enough, obviously.

OOOPS and we can't have even a MORE polarized american people, now can we? We I think that we had reached the polarized limit there and in fact, I hate to break it to this study group but this is the one unifying issue this country has seen in almost 7 years. Where some of us were always against this war and could anticipate some of these problems from the get go - it seems now that most of us agree this is a bad bad thing - so no need to worry about unifying us - you have already done so by acting so unilaterally and without concern for the opinions or the voices of the american people. We are all almost in agreement that you have fucked up completely and we are also quite sad that we were unable to do anything about it and now these people have suffered greatly because of it. Polarization is not an issue when it comes to this war or this situation getting any worse.

Now I don’t know about the rest of you and like I said, I am no scholar or a fan of studying anything but my recommendation is that we pull out of Iraq. It’s clear to me that we are not wanted, never were and never will be. If we want the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own future and to participate in determining their own fate then why don’t we start by letting them decide what they need from us or if they need us. So far everyone in that report who is a leader whether an elected government official or an unofficial sectarian leader has been said to oppose the American forces. Everyone even the Sunni leader who wants us to stay to protect them from the Shias (apparently when the Sunnis were in power they weren’t very nice to the Shias) but still oppose our continued occupation and interference. So what do you say that we start by trusting them to decide for themselves what they need and don’t need. Don’t you think and I am sure they do think that we have already done enough thank you very much. So my recommendations are as follows
1) Try and convict all war criminals and war profiteer criminals.
2) Get the hell out of Iraq
3) Get the hell out of Iraq
4) Get the hell out of Iraq
5) Take responsibility
6) Quit blaming everyone else
7) Get the hell out of Iraq
8) Hold those responsible accountable
9) Get the hell out of Iraq
10) And finally – Get the hell out of Iraq for christ’s sake –

I don't think we need a damned study group to hear that message loud and clear.

Additionally the democratic government that is so weak and so non-conforming to the US ideals about how to handle the chaos is all too familiar sounding when described in this report.

What, you say? There are few examples of senior officials being brought to trial and convicted for the corruption they participated in? Where have I heard that before?

What, you say? There are too many politicians acting to serve their own personal interest, sectarian and party ideas and not considering the whole country's needs? Hmmmmm, that sounds all too familiar too.

What, you say? The Iraqi people feel that crimes not only go unpunished but are rewarded? What? The government caters to certain sectors and are unfair in their leadership? Huh? What was that about the problem that the democratic election has been - You mean to say that the Shias are in most of the leaders positions and that they are the majority of the population of Iraq? Surely you jest. Even here in America where we hold fair and free Democratic elections the smallest minority of the elite wealthy run the country - how can that be?

As you can see we have no authority or moral understanding of how one accomplishes integrity within government or moral ideas in establishing security and fair and justice throughout. We have no authority at all to be leading this country away from corruption, scandals, immoral acts and inhumane treatment of each other because we have not managed any of the above ourselves.

Get the hell out of Iraq - give them the money for reconstruction - facilitate a different security force made up of those that all Iraqis can agree on - a neutral party and quit instigating the violence, supplying them with the munitions and building the largest us embassy ever instead of ensuring they have water to drink. Work on your own problems with leaders advocating torture and presidents over throwing supreme court decisions regarding prisoners rights to fair trials. Then take some responsibility and sincerely do whatever you can that they wish you to do - for their interests and forget all of your own - because now is not a time for you to worry about what you want and need - it's a time for you to worry about what you have done and how you can fix it America. And You don't need a god damned study group to figure that out.

over and out.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 04:28 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC