How can Bush continue to sell his occupation when Iraqis are counting down the days till we leave?

[bigtree]

The basic test of freedom is perhaps less in what we are free to do than in what we are free not to do. It is the freedom to refrain, withdraw and abstain which makes a totalitarian regime impossible. --Hoffer


Whatever way the WH or supporters of continuing the occupation of Iraq spin the new resolution gaining steam in the Iraqi parliament, it's clear that the legislators there are counting down the days to our exit and are prepared to make that the law of their land.

Days after both Bush and Cheney gave lip service to the notion that time was running out for the Maliki regime to follow through on the political promises Bush says our troops are fighting and dying to give them 'room' to carry through, legislators in Iraq's parliament were busy gathering an overwhelming amount of commitments from members of the National Assembly for a resolution setting a timetable for U.S. withdrawal.

It was reported today that as many as144 members of the 275-seat national assembly have signed a draft law that would essentially have the Baghdad parliament decide the fate of the four-year old U.S. occupation; rather than those at the head of the propped-up regime whose lackeys were hobnobbing with our own legislators on Capitol Hill today, trying to convince wavering republicans to continue their protection behind the sacrifices of our soldiers.

It's become more than clear that the Iraqi regime has little incentive to make any of the political changes regarding their oil or mending their relationship with their Sunni rivals that the White House has been using as justification for continuing the escalated U.S. military presence. It's even less apparent that there is any discussion at all among the rank and file of the Iraqi parliament about the need for U.S. protection against terrorist elements the WH says are responsible for aggravating the violence to the point of making Iraq the 'center of the terror front' as Cheney called it yesterday, and echoed by the Maliki regime lackeys visiting Washington.

At some point Bush will either be forced to admit that there is no realistic hope of Iraqis achieving anything political which would bring an end to the fighting there; or else, just assert the truth which has been apparent to everyone looking on, that he intends to wage his militarism with impunity in Iraq no matter how Iraqi feel about it.

Even before protesters took to the streets demanding the U.S. exit earlier this year, there were polls of Iraqis in September showing solid opposition to the U.S. presence. 71% of those polled said they would like the Iraqi government to ask for US-led forces to be withdrawn from Iraq within a year or less. 79% said the US is having a negative influence. 53% said a U.S. exit would strengthen their government, and 58% said they thought the violence would decrease if the U.S. went home.

Still, the Bush administration insisted they were acting on behalf of the Iraqi government in remaining, who they said, were representative of those who had voted in the elections held under the occupation of our invading forces years ago. Now, it's clear that the 'elected' Shia-dominated Iraqi government is satisfied enough with the spoils of their U.S. gifted authority to openly spurn the promised perpetuation of the Bush cabal's protection racket.

Bush spoke to his impression of the will of the Iraqis for continuing to tolerate his occupation as he tried to deflect the results of the defeat of his republican enablers in the November congressional elections:

"The enemy wants to know whether or not the United States has the will to stay engaged in this ideological struggle," he said in a WaPo interview in December. "They don't believe we do. That's what they say. And I believe that's what they believe," he said.

"The third group of people I speak to are the Iraqis," Bush continued. "They wonder whether the United States has got the will to help them achieve their objectives. That's what they wonder," he said. "The leaders I have talked to wonder whether or not — what the elections mean . . . But in the back of their mind, they're saying, "Are they going to leave us again?"

That now appears to be what the Iraqis are indeed saying, in overwhelming and increasing numbers. "Are they going to leave us again?"

"Will they ever leave us again?"


http://journals.democraticunderground.com/bigtree

[malaise]

1. He'll overthrow the government

well he'll try to overthrow the government. Bush will soon run from Iraq.

[bigtree]

2. something (someone) will have to give

at any rate, it should be interesting to see how Maliki spins this into the summer.

They can't hold this back forever, and the parliament seems as content to take a month off while our soldiers are being killed 'defending' them as they are to just sit on their hands while in session.

[bigtree]

3. link to (edited) Op-ed News final

May 12, 2007 at 06:56:46

Bush Can't Sell His Occupation If His Junta's Telling Him To Leave

by Ron Fullwood

[Lord Balto]

4. Condi only reads him the good news in the big newspaper

Face it. The freak never grew up. He sticks his fingers in his ears if anyone tries to tell him what's really going on.

[bigtree]

5. He's not the one we expect to hear the Iraqis as they reject our forces

it's his republican enablers as they still insist the Iraqis want us there.

They need to eat their words about Iraq's new sovereignty; and tell the American people why our troops are still fighting and dying for an Iraqi regime that's engorged with the power they've achieved behind the sacrifices of our soldiers.

[Brigid]

11. That's for sure.

Ever since the Democrats took the House and the Senate, Bush has been behaving like a spoiled kid whose parents have decided they need to start disciplining him. It's almost comical in a way.

[Time for change]

6. I wish more people would talk about these issues!

With all the talk by our corporate media about the Iraq War, they rarely discuss what in my opinion should be a central point in the whole argument -- THE IRAQIS WANT US OUT OF THEIR COUNTRY. Democrats also should be talking about this a lot. Why is it that the desire of the Iraqi people should be almost totally neglected in discussion of OUR future in Iraq? :mad:

[bigtree]

7. If this isn't the crux of the argument then we're just talking imperialism

something more in line with the initial invasion and overthrow of a sovereign government for nothing but U.S. interest and gain. Exactly the opposite of the pretense of 'spreading democracy' the republicans claim as they roll over the Iraqis behind the sacrifices of our soldiers.

[Time for change]

12. Absolutely

[Brigid]

10. I can answer that one.

It's because the question "What's our oil doing under their sand?" seems more important that Iraq's right to self-determination. :banghead:

[Time for change]

13. Yes, but I would have thought that at least liberals would talk more about this

Seems to me like they're intimidated against talking about it, as if it's a taboo subject, likely to be met with accusations of treason. I just don't get it.

[Brigid]

8. The Iraqis are counting?

Well, so are we. Is it January 20, 2009 at 12:00 noon yet? :banghead:

BTW, how many are planning parties for that day? :D

[bigtree]

9. Think of the death toll multiplied by that many months

The day our country is released from under Bush's buggery will be less a celebration than a sad relief that we've managed to survive

[Brigid]

14. And the worst part is . . .

the Iraqi parliament going on vacation for two months while our troops are dying every day. Somebody want to explain that one? :banghead: