| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
luke
Joined: 11 Feb 2007
Location: by the sea
|
 Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:24 pm Post subject: US threatens to sack Iraqi Prime Minister |
 |
|
|
|
| Quote: | US threatens to sack Iraqi Prime Minister
Arabic news websites have been reporting that during his recent five day visit to Iraq, US Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte ('the Butcher of El Salvador' and former US ambassador to Iraq), threatened the al-Maliki government. He informed al-Maliki that unless he approved the Strategic Security Plan he would be deposed and replaced by a dictator. With its international mandate in Iraq set to expire, the Bush administration insists that the government in Baghdad give the US authority to conduct combat operations and hold battlefield detainees, to maintain permanent bases in Iraq, and to guarantee American troops and civilian contractors immunity from Iraqi law.
This is a deal that violates Iraqi sovereignty and will be extremely unpopular with the general population and these demands put the government in a very precarious situation. Similar desperate measures are being taken by the occupiers in Afghanistan. British military leaders and senior diplomats have stated that victory is impossible and that they would soon be looking for an 'acceptable' dictator to replace Hamid Karzai. British Brigadier Mark Carleton-Smith, top UK military officer in Afghanistan said, "We're not going to win this war. It's about reducing it to a manageable level of insurgency that's not a strategic threat and can be managed by the Afghan army," The head of the French military, General Jean-Louis Georgelin on Wednesday echoed these comments and said, "there is no military solution to the Afghan crisis."
The occupation of both countries had nothing to do with democracy or respect for human rights. In Iraq the occupiers created a political system under which subservient political leaders would be dumped once they had served their purpose. We have seen this before - in Vietnam for example!
The reason why Iraq was occupied was to enable the US to physically control the country's energy sources and exert influence over the wider Middle East. The Security Pact and new oil laws aim to institutionalise this situation.
Even after six years of occupation the US has been unable to get any of this in place. This is evidence of the failure of the occupation largely as a result of the people's resistance. Bombs exploded outside the Iraqi capital's tightly guarded Green Zone on Tuesday as Negroponte wrapped up his visit. Neither imposing new governments or trying to force through secret deals is likely to deliver for the US. In Afghanistan opposition to the occupation is growing, in Iraq what legitimacy the government has is eroding fast. These kind of moves by the occupiers are likely to inflame the situation in both countries.
(Source: US threatens to sack Iraqi Prime Minister (c) 2008, Iraqi Democrats Against the Occupation. Sabah Jawad. ) |
from http://www.stopwar.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=790&Itemid=1
 
it'll be interesting to see the propaganda and spin to try and justify this! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
faceless
admin
Joined: 25 Apr 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
An acceptable dictator eh? There's a surprise...
All those people who think that any of this war was carried out in order to benefit the people of Iraq should have something to think on now - and if they still think that the invasion was correct after this then they really will believe anything. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Couchtripper - 2005-2015
|
