Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Rep. Barbara Lee on modeling US military presence in Iraq after S. Korea~

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 (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-31-07 02:29 PM
Original message
Rep. Barbara Lee on modeling US military presence in Iraq after S. Korea~
Edited on Thu May-31-07 02:30 PM by babylonsister
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/014401.php

Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) on the newly announced White House policy ...

"The White House announcement that they view South Korea as the model for a permanent U.S. military presence in Iraq is further evidence of how dangerously out of touch with reality this administration is.

"On a strictly historical level, the comparison is comical. A high school student could tell you that there are virtually no similarities between the Korea and Iraq. The administration's inept attempts to come up with tortured historical analogies to try to justify a failed policy should be another reminder just how little credibility they have on the issue.

"The frightening truth is that there are obviously people within the Bush administration who believe that it is a good idea to occupy Iraq military on a permanent basis, which is why we have fought so hard in Congress to establish a clear policy to prevent permanent military bases in Iraq.

"The overwhelming majority of Iraqis want an end to the occupation, and for the White House to suggest that it will continue for another fifty years, or perhaps permanently, only fuels the insurgency and further endangers our troops.

"The American people are also calling for an end to the occupation, and the fact that the administration has responded by saying they think the occupation should be permanent just underlines not only how out of touch they are, but how critical it is for Congress to intervene to bring an end to this failed policy."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-31-07 02:31 PM
Response to Original message
1. very good statement
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sinkingfeeling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-31-07 02:48 PM
Response to Original message
2. How come we're not shouting from the rooftops that Bush is emboldening the enemy
(the insurgency) with all his talk of staying in Iraq for 50 years?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mike_c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-31-07 03:00 PM
Response to Original message
3. the war against Iraq was always about imperialism,...
Edited on Thu May-31-07 03:00 PM by mike_c
...middle eastern hegemony, and corporate colonialism. The neocon objectives for political, economic, and military control of the middle east require a large permanent garrison. The military presence in South Korea was "necessary" to fight the spread of communism and maintain U.S. hegemony in SE Asia. A 50 year military presence in Iraq is "necessary" to fight the spread of oil depletion and maintain U.S. hegemony in the Middle East.

Gee, Korea and Iraq are not that different after all!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-31-07 03:06 PM
Response to Original message
4. Are they going to tell us how well the occupations of Vietnam, Haiti, and Panama worked out? K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happyslug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-31-07 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Panama worked out quite nicely, we still de facto control the canal.
As Haiti and Nicaragua, the US did pull out but then supported a brutal dictator who ruled through fear in both Nicaragua (Somoza García) and Haiti ("Papa Doc" Francois Duvalier).

US Intervention in Nicaragua:
http://countrystudies.us/nicaragua/10.htm

More on Nicaragua:
http://countrystudies.us/nicaragua/

US intervention in Haiti:
http://countrystudies.us/haiti/15.htm

More On Haiti:
http://countrystudies.us/haiti/


Other Occupation:
Dominican Republic:
http://countrystudies.us/dominican-republic/10.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-31-07 03:30 PM
Response to Original message
5. Impeach now! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seafan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-31-07 05:46 PM
Response to Original message
7. That's funny, Jeb is going to South Korea this week.
Edited on Thu May-31-07 05:56 PM by seafan
These people don't do anything uncalculated.



Jeb Bush, a former Florida governor and the younger brother of U.S. President George W. Bush, will visit South Korea this week at the invitation of Ryu Jin, chairman of the Poongsan Corp., company officials said Sunday.

Bush, 54, is scheduled to meet top executives of the Korea International Trade Association and the heads of local governments on Thursday to discuss ways to enhance relations between the two countries, said Poongsan officials. Poongsan is a leading South Korean producer of fabricated copper and copper alloys.

He is also to deliver a speech on mixed bloods at a memorial center for American writer Pearl S. Buck, winner of a Nobel Prize in Literature and passionate human rights advocate, located in Bucheon, just west of Seoul, they said.

Ryu of Poongsan has maintained friendly ties with the Bush family and Republican leaders and he has invited former U.S. President George H.W. Bush, the father of Jeb Bush and the current U.S. president, they said. The latest visit of former U.S. president Bush to Seoul was made last November.

.....



Bush Sees South Korea Model for Iraq

May 30, 2007 10:01 PM

By TERENCE HUNT

WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush envisions a long-term U.S. troop presence in Iraq similar to the one in South Korea where American forces have helped keep an uneasy peace for more than 50 years, the White House said Wednesday.

.....

The administration warns that the buildup will result in more U.S. casualties as more American soldiers come into contact with enemy forces. May already is the third bloodiest month since the war began in March 2003. As of late Tuesday, there were 116 U.S. deaths in Iraq so far in May - trailing only the 137 in November 2004 and the 135 in April 2004. Overall, more than 3,460 U.S. service members have died.

Presidential spokesman Tony Snow said Bush has cited the long-term Korea analogy in looking at the U.S. role in Iraq, where American forces are in the fifth year of an unpopular war. Bush's goal is for Iraqi forces to take over the chief security responsibilities, relieving U.S. forces of frontline combat duty, Snow said.

``I think the point he's trying to make is that the situation in Iraq, and indeed, the larger war on terror, are things that are going to take a long time,'' Snow said. ``But it is not always going to require an up-front combat presence.''
Instead, he said, U.S. troops would provide ``the so-called over-the-horizon support that is necessary from time to time to come to the assistance of the Iraqis. But you do not want the United States forever in the front.''

The comparison with South Korea paints a picture of a lengthy U.S. commitment at a time when Americans have grown weary of the Iraq war and want U.S. troops to start coming home.

.....

Later, Snow said it was impossible to say if U.S. troops would remain in Iraq for some 50 years, as they have in South Korea. ``I don't know,'' he said. ``It is an unanswerable question. But I'm not making that suggestion. ... The war on terror is a long war.''

.....

Adm. William Fallon, the top U.S. commander in the Middle East, seemed a surprising choice when he got the job earlier this year, yet his experience as U.S. commander in the Pacific overseeing the Korean peninsula would serve him well if the U.S. military adopts a Korea model in Iraq.




And here is Juan Cole's take on this:

On the False Analogy Between Iraq and South Korea

May 31, 2007


Bush is now talking about a "South Korea" model for Iraq. He likely got this nonsense from John Gaddis at Yale, who I heard talking it last November at the Chicago Humanities Fair.

So what confuses me is the terms of the comparison. Who is playing the role of the Communists and of North Korea? Is it the Sunni Arabs of Iraq? But they are divided into Iraqi/Arab nationalists and Salafi Sunni revivalists. (The secular Arab nationalists are the vast majority according to recent polling). So they are not a united force. They are fighting with one another in al-Anbar. And, the Arab nationalists and the religious Sunnis cannot both play the role of the Communists. Some Arab nationalists are allied with the United States (Egypt, Tunisia, etc.) Others are not (Syria). Some religious Sunnis are allied with the US (Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan). Others are not. So where is the analogy to International Communism? Who is China and who is the Soviet Union? Is it Syria and Iran? But both are ruled by Shiites, not Sunnis!

But let us say that the Sunni Arabs are North Korea. Who is South Korea? Is it the Shiites of Iraq? But they are allied with Iran (isn't it playing the role of China?) And the vast majority of them don't want US troops in Iraq according to polls. There is zero chance that the Shiites of Iraq will put up with a long term presence of US bases in their areas of Iraq. The British base in Basra takes heavy fire all the time.

.....



Coincidentally, is Reverend Moon nearby?



We are never leaving Iraq, as long as these criminals remain in power.

That's the bottom line. Congress, except for a few notable exceptions among your members, remove your blinders.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-31-07 10:14 PM
Response to Original message
8. Does anyone except Barbara and a couple dozen other congresspeople not think
the US should be in Iraq for several decades?
Just because the US public opposes such a plan don't think congress and the next Dem President won't go for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-31-07 11:03 PM
Response to Original message
9. Brilliant, if we just put a bunch of land mines accross the 38th parallel...
Edited on Thu May-31-07 11:04 PM by Hippo_Tron
The insurgency won't be able to cross it. Gee why didn't I think of that?

:eyes:
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 26th 2024, 05:13 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) 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