| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| So is this what the Iraq war is all about?; Permanent bases in the Middle East | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Apr 3 2006, 05:52 AM (305 Views) | |
| kathyk | Apr 3 2006, 05:52 AM Post #1 |
|
Pisa-Carp
|
I stumbled on this the other day in the context of the debate over whether one can be against the war and support the troops at the same time. I found this an interesting thesis - not new - but put in new context (at least for me). If all fits perfectly with the old PNAC goals of establishing new bases in the middle east. (from Dahr Jamail, in Iraq) ......................... .................... .................. My point is, if there is a concerted effort by high-ranking officials of the Bush administration to portray things in Iraq as going well, then why are there permanent bases being constructed in Iraq? This media smokescreen from the likes of Pace, Rice and even "sharp-shooter" Cheney, who recently said things in Iraq are "improving steadily," conveniently leads the American people toward believing there will eventually be a withdrawal of American soldiers. But the problem with smokescreens is that pesky thing called "reality." And in Iraq, the reality is that people like Pace, Rice, Cheney and their ever-eloquent front man aren't telling the American public about their true plans for Iraq. One example that provides some insight into their agenda is the US "Embassy" which is under construction in the infamous "Green Zone." As you read this, a controversial Kuwait-based construction firm is building a $592 million US embassy < http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=13258 > in Baghdad. When the dust settles, this compound will be the largest and most secure diplomatic compound in the world. The headquarters, I mean "Embassy," will be a self-sustaining cluster of 21 buildings reinforced 2.5 times the usual standards, with some walls to be as thick as 15 feet. Plans are for over 1,000 US "government officials" to staff and reside there. Lucky for them, they will have access to the gym, swimming pool, barber and beauty shops, food court and commissary. There will also be a large-scale barracks for troops, a school, locker rooms, a warehouse, a vehicle maintenance garage, and six apartment buildings with a total of 619 one-bedroom units. And luckily for the "government officials," their water, electricity and sewage treatment plants will all be independent from Baghdad's city utilities. The total site will be two-thirds the area of the National Mall in Washington, DC." I wonder if any liberated Iraqis will have access to their swimming pool? And unlike the Iraqi infrastructure, which is in total shambles and functioning below pre-invasion levels in nearly every area, the US "Embassy" is being constructed right on time. The US Senate Foreign Affairs Committee recently called this an "impressive" feat, considering the construction is taking place in one of the most violent and volatile spots on the planet. Then there are the permanent military bases. To give you an idea of what these look like in Iraq, let's start with Camp Anaconda, near Balad. Occupying 15 square miles of Iraq, the base boasts two swimming pools (not the plastic inflatable type), a gym, mini-golf course and first-run movie theater. The 20,000 soldiers who live at the Balad Air Base http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6020302994.html , less than 1,000 of whom ever leave the base, can inspect new iPod accessories in one of the two base exchanges, which have piles of the latest electronics and racks of CDs to choose from. One of the PX managers recently boasted that every day he was selling 15 televisions to soldiers. At Camp Anaconda, located in al-Anbar province where resistance is fierce, the occupation forces live in air-conditioned units where plans are being drawn up to run internet, cable television and overseas telephone access to them. The thousands of civilian contractors live at the base in a section called "KBR-land," and there is a hospital where doctors carry out 400 surgeries every month on wounded troops. Air Force officials on the base claim the runway there is one of the busiest in the world, where unmanned Predator drones take off carrying their Hellfire missiles, along with F-16's, C-130's, helicopters, and countless others, as the bases houses over 250 aircraft. If troops aren't up for the rather lavish dinners served by "Third Country Nationals" from India, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh who work for slave wages, they can visit the Burger King, Pizza Hut, Popeye's or Subway, then wash it down with a mocha from the Starbucks. There are several other gigantic bases in Iraq besides camp Anaconda, such as Camp Victory near Baghdad Airport, which - according to a reporter for Mother Jones magazine - when complete will be twice the size of Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo. The Kosovo base is currently one of the largest overseas bases built since the war in Vietnam. Camp Liberty is adjacent to Camp Victory - where soldiers even compete in their own triathlons. "The course, longer than 140 total miles, spanned several bases in the greater Camp Victory area in west Baghdad," says a news article on a DOD web site http://www.defendamerica.mil/articles/nov2...a110705dg2.html Mr. Bush refuses to set a timetable for withdrawal http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/30/us.iraq/ from Iraq because he doesn't intend to withdraw. He doesn't intend to because he's following a larger plan for the US in the Middle East. Less than two weeks after the fall of Baghdad on April 9, 2003, US military officials <http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/042103B.shtml> announced the intention to maintain at least four large bases in Iraq that could be used in the future. These are located near Baghdad International Airport (where the triathlon was), Tallil (near Nasiriyah, in the south), one in the Kurdish north at either Irbil or Qayyarah (they are only 50 kilometers apart) and one in western al-Anbar province at Al-Asad. Of course, let's not forget the aforementioned Camp Anaconda in Balad. More recently, on May 22 of last year, US military commanders http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2100611_pf.html announced that they would consolidate troops into four large air bases. It was announced at this time that while buildings were being made of concrete instead of the usual metal trailers and tin-sheathed buildings, military officers working on the plan "said the consolidation plan was not meant to establish a permanent US military presence in Iraq." Right. The US has at least four of these massive bases in Iraq. Billions of dollars have been spent in their construction, and they are in about the same locations where they were mentioned they would be by military planners back before Mr. Bush declared that major combat operations were over http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/05/01/...ain551946.shtml in Iraq. It appears as though "mission accomplished http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/05/01/...arrier.landing/ " in Iraq was not necessarily referring to guarding the Ministry of Oil and occupying the country indefinitely (or finding WMDs, disrupting al-Qaeda, or liberating Iraqis, blah-blah-blah), but to having a military beach-head in the heart of the Middle East. Note that while US officials don't dare say the word "permanent" when referring to military bases in Iraq, they will say "permanent access." An article entitled "Pentagon Expects Long-Term Access to Four Key Bases in Iraq," which was a front-page story in the New York Times on April 19, 2003, reads: "There will probably never be an announcement of permanent stationing of troops. Not permanent basing, but permanent access is all that is required, officials say." Why all of this? Why these obviously permanent bases? Why the beach-head? A quick glance at US government military strategy documents is even more revealing. "Our forces will be strong enough to dissuade potential adversaries from pursuing a military build-up in hopes of surpassing, or equaling, the power of the United States," reads the 2002 National Security Strategy http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nssall.html To accomplish this, the US will "require bases and stations within and beyond Western Europe and Northeast Asia." Another interesting document is "Joint Vision 2020" from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, whose "vision" is "Dedicated individuals and innovative organizations transforming the joint force of the 21st Century to achieve full spectrum dominance: persuasive in peace, decisive in war, preeminent in any form of conflict." US policymakers have replaced the Cold War with the Long War for Global Empire and Unchallenged Military Hegemony. This is the lens through which we must view Iraq to better understand why there are permanent US bases there. In the Quadrennial Defense Review Report released on February 6, 2006, there is a stated ambition to fight "multiple, overlapping wars" and to "ensure that all major and emerging powers are integrated as constructive actors and stakeholders into the international system." The report goes on to say that the US will "also seek to ensure that no foreign power can dictate terms of regional or global security. It will attempt to dissuade any military competitor from developing disruptive or other capabilities that could enable regional hegemony or hostile action against the United States or other friendly countries, and it will seek to deter aggression or coercion. Should deterrence fail, the United States would deny a hostile power its strategic and operational objectives." In sum, what is the purpose of permanent US military garrisons in Iraq and the implicit goals of these government documents? Empire. _______________________________________________ ©2004, 2005 Dahr Jamail. Veterans against the war |
| Blogging in Palestine: http://kksjournal.com/ | |
![]() |
|
| Kool Aid | Apr 3 2006, 07:15 AM Post #2 |
|
Advanced Member
|
Drink me. |
![]() |
|
| Larry | Apr 3 2006, 11:33 AM Post #3 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
BUSH LIED! MOON PIES FRIED!!! JIM CRW WATCHIN' FROM THE OTHER SIDE!...... |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Rick Zimmer | Apr 3 2006, 02:52 PM Post #4 |
|
Fulla-Carp
|
Kathy, You brain dead liberal, pinko traitor! You and your husband too! Are you actually saying that a policy document prepared in the mid 1990's and signed by virtually every top foreign and defense policy maker in the Bush Administration would be the basis for their leading us to war? Why, if this were true, the next thing we'd find out is that they started to talk about the invasion within days after 9/11, as soon as they saw their chance to implement this strategy! I have never read one statement by any soldier on the ground that refers to PNAC! That should prove your fantasy allegations wrong and certainly explains why people like you should be shot by anyone entering your house wearing a uniform of the US military! Hell, soon after PNAC was being identified as the source for Bush's actions towards Iraq, the document was removed from the PNAC website! That should prove that it is not the basis of these decisions! If it were, it would still be on the web -- unless you are suggesting that Bush and his Administration were using other excuses to justify this war! It's people like you who don't have the brains to think things through -- or think at all! -- much less even comprehend reality. This is why we can never let people like you in charge of the government ever again. Bunch of left wing nutjobs! |
| [size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size] | |
![]() |
|
| kathyk | Apr 3 2006, 02:57 PM Post #5 |
|
Pisa-Carp
|
WAAAAAA!
|
| Blogging in Palestine: http://kksjournal.com/ | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | Apr 3 2006, 06:55 PM Post #6 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
You've heard the old expression, "the blind leading the blind"..... I guess the above exchange would be the deluded leading the psychotic.... |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |







WAAAAAA!
10:33 AM Jul 11