Thread: Revealed: Secret Plan to Keep Iraq Under US Control

Bush wants 50 military bases, control of Iraqi airspace and legal immunity for all American soldiers and contractors.

A secret deal being negotiated in Baghdad would perpetuate the American military occupation of Iraq indefinitely, regardless of the outcome of the US presidential election in November.

Article here.............

The war has been going as planned for this administration. Now they will get their 50 bases because they know that there is nobody to stop it. Mid East domination has been the plan all along. It had nothing to do with weapons, nukes, the way Iraqi's treat women, Saddam was a bad guy, used WMD against own people, none of it. That crap was dreamed up to divide and conquer us the dupes. Way to go!!

Long-time imperial control should not be the business of a lame duck president. Given only around 2-3% of Iraqis support a long-term US presence in their country, this plan will probably be scrapped soon due to immense popular opposition.

Originally Posted by michaelr

Article here.............

The war has been going as planned for this administration. Now they will get their 50 bases because they know that there is nobody to stop it. Mid East domination has been the plan all along. It had nothing to do with weapons, nukes, the way Iraqi's treat women, Saddam was a bad guy, used WMD against own people, none of it. That crap was dreamed up to divide and conquer us the dupes. Way to go!!

[/b]

Not a reliable source. Belongs to a fringe element group. If this was a story piece in a respected non partisan news group then more than likely it might have some credibility. To me this just seems to be a made up piece. Unless you have a mainstream news media source then I find this suspect. This is no better than someones personal blog or a forum post without any citable form of reference.

Awww, lets not worry about it, Obama will take care of all that. LOL
However, I'm not sure I'd take the Independent too seriously. Besides, doesn't congress have to approvr thr funding?

Originally Posted by deepthought

Not a reliable source. Belongs to a fringe element group. If this was a story piece in a respected non partisan news group then more than likely it might have some credibility. To me this just seems to be a made up piece. Unless you have a mainstream news media source then I find this suspect. This is no better than someones personal blog or a forum post without any citable form of reference.

Really the Independent UK is a blog, are you nuts or just hoping this is not why so many US troops were killed or whats your story?

Maybe a blog, but just as the WP has a blog, the independent is a UK Newspaper that is decidely left wing.

Originally Posted by Migi e!

Awww, lets not worry about it, Obama will take care of all that. LOL
However, I'm not sure I'd take the Independent too seriously. Besides, doesn't congress have to approvr thr funding?

Well by all indications the story is gold.

Long-Term Contracts Show Plans for Continued Iraq Occupation


You do trust the Washington post don't you?

Originally Posted by michaelr

Well by all indications the story is gold.

Long-Term Contracts Show Plans for Continued Iraq Occupation


You do trust the Washington post don't you?

What other indications?
It isn't that I don't believe that Bush would like permanent bases in Iraq, (why is a mystery though since we do have permanent bases in Kuwait) but I don't believe that there's enough time on his term to get that accompolished.

Originally Posted by Migi e!

Awww, lets not worry about it, Obama will take care of all that. LOL
However, I'm not sure I'd take the Independent too seriously. Besides, doesn't congress have to approvr thr funding?

Exactly congress would have to ok the funding. It's one thing to give a budget for necessary equipment it's quite another to ok funding for the building of permanent bases. The opposition would be too great for this kind of funding and further the Democrats would have a field day in the press with it. Again this is just a hog wash piece that has no basis in fact imho.

Originally Posted by Migi e!

What other indications?
It isn't that I don't believe that Bush would like permanent bases in Iraq, (why is a mystery though since we do have permanent bases in Kuwait) but I don't believe that there's enough time on his term to get that accompolished.

Kuwait invited us, lets not forget that we for all intensive purposes, stole Iraq.