Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Jim Miklaszeski on MSRNC just said it! A Permanent US Presence in Iraq!

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 (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-26-05 10:17 AM
Original message
Jim Miklaszeski on MSRNC just said it! A Permanent US Presence in Iraq!
Edited on Wed Oct-26-05 10:19 AM by leftchick
He was reporting from the pentagon and talking about the 2000 dead and how the Military plans to stick with the Stay the course and build up Iraqi forces so they can "partially" protect themselves. AND... He said, though no one has come right out and said it, that it is obvious the US will have a Permanent Presence in Iraq even after that!

:wow:

The whore media is finally admiting what we have known all along. The US intends to stay in Iraq FOREVER!

Background...

<snip>


Now comes a report in the New York Sun by Eli Lake revealing that the Pentagon is building a permanent military communications system in Iraq, a necessary foundation for any lasting troop presence. The new network will comprise twelve communications towers throughout Iraq, linking Camp Victory in Baghdad to other existing (and future) bases across the country, eventually connecting with US bases in Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Afghanistan.

"People need to get realistic and think in terms of our presence being in Iraq for a generation or until democratic stability in the region is reached," Dewey Clarridge, the CIA's former chief of Arab operations (and Iran-contra point man), told the Sun.

The fabled "exit strategy" may be not to exit. Thomas Donnelly, a defense specialist at the American Enterprise Institute, said the new communication system resembles those built in West Germany and the Balkans, places where American troops remain today. "The operational advantages of US bases in Iraq should be obvious for other power-projection missions in the region," Donnelly wrote in an AEI policy paper.

Next time the Bush Administration hints at withdrawing troops, keep these grand plans in mind.

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/outrage?bid=13&pid=2132
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Extend a Hand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-26-05 10:19 AM
Response to Original message
1. until every last drop
of their oil is 'liberated'
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shadowknows69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-26-05 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #1
15. Or our soldiers blood is spilled
whichever comes first.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OneBlueSky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-26-05 10:20 AM
Response to Original message
2. and this comes as a surprise? . . . it's been the plan from Day 1 . . n/t
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-26-05 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. certainly not to me/us
It is a shock that someone on TV said it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Loonman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-26-05 10:20 AM
Response to Original message
3. Wow.
It's like Vietnam never happened.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibDemAlways Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-26-05 10:26 AM
Response to Original message
5. I remember after the chimp declared
"Mission Accomplished" idiots here in knuckle-dragging Ventura County CA festooned huge numbers of oak trees with yellow ribbons in anticipation of a speedy and joyous homecoming. Today the tattered remnants of those ribbons are still around some of those trees.

This was never about WMDs or bringing "freedom" to anybody. It was always about oil, occupation, and neocon imperialism. The media failed utterly in its responibility to inform the American public what these criminals were really up to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
global1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-26-05 10:47 AM
Response to Original message
6. How Hard Will It Be To Protect Those 12 Communication Towers....
being built? They have target written all over them. Just like the oil wells and pipelines.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-26-05 10:51 AM
Response to Original message
7. Did Anyone Ever Doubt It?
With all of the hundreds of billions that have been spent, did anyone imagine we would not protect our investment in these oil fields, by force if necessary?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-26-05 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #7
18. only those of us with critical thinking skills
also from the Nation article I posted. Very few in congress and virtually none in the media have addressed those bases...

<snip>

In his first debate with President Bush, John Kerry made a surprisingly bold assertion about US policy toward Iraq: "I think a critical component of success in Iraq is being able to convince the Iraqis and the Arab world that the United States doesn't have long-term designs on it," Kerry said. "As I understand it, we're building some 14 military bases there now, and some people say they've got a rather permanent concept to them."

Though the media ignored Kerry's statement and failed to do any substantive follow-up research, his comments were well-grounded in reality. On the day of the debate the Christian Science Monitor spotlighted the findings of defense specialist John Pike, whose website, GlobalSecurity.org, located twelve "enduring bases" in Iraq, including satellite photos and names. In March, the Chicago Tribune reported that US engineers were constructing fourteen such long-term encampments--the number Kerry referred to. The New York Times previously placed the number at four.

... It is like a HUGE dirty secret!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
starroute Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-26-05 10:52 AM
Response to Original message
8. Dewey Claridge? Oh, great
"People need to get realistic and think in terms of our presence being in Iraq for a generation or until democratic stability in the region is reached," Dewey Clarridge, the CIA's former chief of Arab operations (and Iran-contra point man), told the Sun.

That would, of course, be the Dewey Claridge mentioned in numerous current threads as a military consultant to the INC and likely object of Fitzgerald's scrutiny for his possible involvement in the Niger forgeries.

Not that it means he's wrong about us staying in Iraq forever. He's just not exactly an unbiased witness.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thebigidea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-26-05 10:55 AM
Response to Original message
9. and that little twit is a permanent presence at the Pentagon
its so appropriate that he reports in front of a gigantic DOD seal - that's all he is, a Pentagon PR flack like Larry-Joe DeRita.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-26-05 10:56 AM
Response to Original message
10. If Miklaszeski knows this why doesn't Senator Levin?
Levin keeps saying we just need a little bit longer and we will be out of Iraq in a jiffy? Someones lying to me. Wonder who it is?

Don
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-26-05 10:59 AM
Response to Original message
11. I heard him. Like that's a surprise? What else would they
be building permanent military bases for? We've known about their military bases for years. Bastards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-26-05 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #11
19. and the blonde news bunny said....
NOTHING! She just nodded... "Okie dokie Jim thank you for that report"! :banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OmmmSweetOmmm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-26-05 10:59 AM
Response to Original message
12. I think that the permanent bases being built are one of the best hide in
plain sight secrets that is being withheld from the public. A show of hands! How many times have you heard a politician bring them up??? Can't see any hands! There's the answer.......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lectrobyte Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-26-05 10:59 AM
Response to Original message
13. Not really new news...
You may want to read some of the neocon's position papers to get an idea why this is going on:

http://www.newamericancentury.org/index.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-26-05 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #13
20. I know that
It is the general population of the USA that is clueless to it. That is why I was shocked to finally see it admitted to in broad daylight by a mediawhore like Mik!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Just Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-26-05 11:05 AM
Response to Original message
14. IT'S ABOUT FREAKIN' TIME!!!!
We all knew, even BEFORE the Iraq invasion, that the neoconsters' plan was permanent presence!!!

:grr: I get so P-O'd at these so-called reporters who fail to research PNAC, which maps out the administration's foreign policy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DURHAM D Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-26-05 11:09 AM
Response to Original message
16. Haven't we heard from the beginning that we are building
14 permanent bases in Iraq - the biggest one in western Iraq and mostly underground at a cost of a few billion dollars. Soon after the war started Sey Hersh said we would never occupy the giant underground bunker because we would run out of money and the American public would not have a taste for the occupation. My question was and remains - who gets to use it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
catmandu57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-26-05 11:12 AM
Response to Original message
17. What they intend to do and reality is a different matter
Remember they intended to roll into Baghdad as conquering herosa with flowers and chocolates and virgins for the command. Didn't happen did it?
It's good to be out in the open however, maybe if john q. hears this they might put two and two together.
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 Apr 19th 2024, 10:54 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) 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