Comments on: Why Won’t Reporters Ask Bush about Permanent U.S. Bases in Iraq?

By: Jon

Jon — Tue, 04 Apr 2006 11:52:04 +0000

Again, they were quite open about this before the war. In fact, establishing Iraq as a staging ground for Imperial, er, U.S. forces was offered by various neo-cons as a major benefit of the conquest.

By: tokenscot

tokenscot — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 23:29:58 +0000

They’re building bases in Iraq so they have a staging point from which to invade Iran, Syria, etc. Iraq was never the main goal – it was just a stepping stone in a larger plan.

By: EagleFury

EagleFury — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 22:28:51 +0000

I read Kwiatkowski’s interview on the C-SPAN site and agree with CarBlogger that the strategy all along has been to conduct an “invasion” that became a “war of liberation” that morphed into an occupation that will finally end up a military colonization of Iraq. Not being more clever than they are, the Neo-Ferengi have resorted to a clumsy nineteenth century control schema to organize an “Imperium Americanum” geo-political paradigm. It’s based on ruthless, institution-shredding powermongering, recalling the methods of such luminaries as the Butcher of Serbia, now rotting away, and Ceaucescu of Roumania, also rotting away. But, I digress. Permanent bases construction occurred behind the smoke screen of “war, liberation and reconstruction” none of which was actually intended except as political theater. After all, if what you really want is to control oil reserves and dominate a region’s political future, you concoct whatever series of illusions is necessary to keep adversaries guessing and supplicants sibiliant, and you march on. At this interlude, the ancient prophecies are correct, the Earth is a Dark Star, indeed.

By: CarBlogger

CarBlogger — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 16:53:10 +0000

Sigh… Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski was on C-SPAN’s “Q And A” last night and she answers this question and much, much more.
http://www.q-and-a.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1069

I hope someone will watch it or at least read the transcript. She will tell you where all of our money has gone. To build permanent “mega-military” bases in Iraq. She said Bush & Cheney don’t view America as a Republic but as a powerful Unilateral state. Her voice is important.

By: Joe Buckstrap

Joe Buckstrap — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 15:57:29 +0000

Permanent military bases in Iraq has always been the objective of the Dumbya dictatorship.

The orchestration and objective of the war has always been hardwired into the interests of the corporatocracy. The interests of Americans were never considered.

By: plages

plages — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 05:28:20 +0000

Senator Hart is not alone with his question(s)! Where are they, how much have they cost US, and why have we constructed them, if not for “OIL” then why?

By: anonymous

anonymous — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 02:59:30 +0000

No surprise, this. Isn’t that what empires always do? Resources have to be protected from indigenous resistance and from outside influences. And the mainstream media (in cahoots as it is with the powers that be) isn’t going to break such news to the public until it gets a go-ahead signal from the government.(the military, in this instance). That’s because invariably it’s we the people who will have to pay – In lives lost plus lots of moola. Which means that such information has to be carefully introduced – “Our permanent bases will enhance freedom and democracy and be cheaper than keeping a large army in Iraq” (as if that’s the only alternative, etc. etc). Besides, “best we leave such worries to our government”.. That way there’ll be more time for shopping in the mall, the latest celebrity scandal and Monday night football.
But what can we do about this propoganda? See through it, that’s what. And then change the world! .

By: Bob Sakowski

Bob Sakowski — Sun, 02 Apr 2006 23:34:44 +0000

Now we know why there are no funds for the reconstruction of the Iraqi infrastructure, eh?