[Peace-discuss] What was that war about?
C. G. Estabrook
galliher at uiuc.edu
Tue Feb 26 13:30:53 CST 2008
[From the conclusion of a recent speech by Noam Chomsky, excerpted on
Democracy Now! today. --CGE]
...let me finally return to the first member of the Axis of Evil: Iraq.
Washington does have expectations, and they’re explicit. There are
outlined in a Declaration of Principles that was agreed upon, if you can
call it that, between the United States and the US-backed, US-installed
Iraqi government, a government under military occupation. The two of
them issued the Declaration of Principles. It allows US forces to remain
indefinitely in Iraq in order to “deter foreign aggression” -- well, the
only aggression in sight is from the United States, but that’s not
aggression, by definition -- and also to facilitate and encourage “the
flow of foreign investments [to] Iraq, especially American investments.”
I’m quoting. That’s an unusually brazen expression of imperial will.
In fact, it was heightened a few days ago, when George Bush issued
another one of his signing statements declaring that he will reject
crucial provisions of congressional legislation that he had just signed,
including the provision that forbids spending taxpayer money—I’m
quoting—“to establish any military installation or base for the purpose
of providing for the permanent stationing of [United States} Armed
Forces in Iraq” or “to exercise [United States] control of the oil
resources of Iraq." OK? Shortly after, the New York Times reported that
Washington “insists”—if you own the world, you insist—“insists that the
Baghdad government give the United States broad authority to conduct
combat operations,” a demand that “faces a potential buzz saw of
opposition from Iraq, with its…deep sensitivities about being seen as a
dependent state.” It’s supposed to be more third world irrationality.
So, in brief, the United States is now insisting that Iraq must agree to
allow permanent US military installations, grant the United States the
right to conduct combat operations freely, and to guarantee US control
over the oil resources of Iraq. OK? It’s all very explicit, on the
table. It’s kind of interesting that these reports do not elicit any
reflection on the reasons why the United States invaded Iraq. You’ve
heard those reasons offered, but they were dismissed with ridicule. Now
they’re openly conceded to be accurate, but not eliciting any retraction
or even any reflection...
###
More information about the Peace-discuss
mailing list