Antiwar Democrats in Congress have failed in almost every one of their attempts to reverse the Bush administration's Iraq policy. However, they are now pursuing what many call a winnable objective: resisting the establishment of a permanent US presence in Iraq. Full Story »
Posted by Melva Hackney
Finally, we get an article that delves into the issue that has been the "elephant in the room" that no one has been talking about. No one has been questing the government's assertions that we aren't building permanent bases in Iraq, or Bush's signing statement saying he doesn't need Congressional approval to commit to them. But even bigger than that, we have no public debate on our huge military footprint around the world!
' Later, in a January signing statement attached to a defense policy bill, Bush declared that he would disregard a ban on permanent US military bases in Iraq'......How did the US end up with a president who breaks EVERY Law?? Why is he tolerated?? Tolerating this illegal attitude is a dangerous, very likely a fatal, mistake for this country.
good questions are asked ...like this about Iraq's Parliament and their role in the future of bases....... "If the US is interested in democracy, how come it is ignoring the only elected body in the Iraqi government?" Jarrar said.question by Raed Jarrar, Iraq consultant to the American Friends Service Committee........ cynisism is put on hold and hope is present ...........in this writing
This opinion piece presents a straightforward statement of the America First position, but showing little knowledge of history. Shouldn't the U.S. bases in Japan and Korea and Germany be removed first? They have been there for more than 50 years. What about the bases in Kuwait? Etc. The opinions expressed here lack logic.
Retrieving Comments
