<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
It's <i>Patrick</i> Cockburn, Mort, not Alexander - and there's no
Western reporter closer to Iraq than Patrick C.<br>
<br>
I'm actually doubtful about Alexander's reading of the situation,
viz.:<br>
<br>
=========<br>
The American right tried to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat
by claiming that “the surge” – a pr ploy by General David Petraeus
to mask US withdrawal – was a military success, rather than the
Sunni abandoning “national resistance” and throwing in their lot
with the Americans. The left – or the substantial slice of it hewing
to the Milne/Ali line – snatches defeat from the jaws of a victory
over America’s plans for Iraq by proclaiming that America has
successfully established what Milne calls “a new form of
outsourced semi-colonial regime to maintain its grip on the country
and region.” Iraq is in ruins – always the default consequence of
American imperial endeavors. The left should report this, but also
hammer home the message that in terms of its proclaimed objectives
the US onslaught on Iraq was a strategic and military disaster.
That’s the lesson to bring home.<br>
==========<br>
<br>
The US war aims were to establish military bases in the heart of the
world's greatest energy-producing region and gain effective control
over the country with the world's second-largest oil reserves. (The
country with the largest, Saudi Arabia, is already a US "ally.") <br>
<br>
The Bush-Obama assault on Iraq seems to have achieved those aims.
America does seem to have established “a new form of outsourced
semi-colonial regime to maintain its grip on the country and
region.” --CGE<br>
<br>
<br>
On 8/31/10 11:10 AM, Morton K. Brussel wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:72D32365-C2A3-4293-B808-C11F3E31298F@illinois.edu"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Cockburn blithely mentions that the Americans are leaving Iraq, as if their remaining influence will be inconsequential. I doubt this:
Maliki is an Iraqi Quisling to U.S. power.
Otherwise, the article is interesting and possibly correct, but I'd be more convinced if someone closer to Iraq than Cockburn summarize and analyze the situation there. --mkb
On Aug 31, 2010, at 10:34 AM, C. G. Estabrook wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap=""><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.counterpunch.org/patrick08312010.html">http://www.counterpunch.org/patrick08312010.html</a>
_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net">Peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss">http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>