Pentagon wants $millions$ more for 'military construction' in Iraq

bigtree

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Mar-30-06 09:42 AM
Original message

Pentagon wants $millions$ more for 'military construction' in Iraq

Edited on Thu Mar-30-06 10:42 AM by bigtree

More investment in permanent US military bases in Iraq

March 30, 2006
From BBC Online
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4834032.stm

The Pentagon has requested hundreds of millions of dollars in emergency funds for military construction in Iraq, fanning the debate about US long-term intentions there.

"In other words,Rumsfeld has never given up the possibility of moving bases further east, which was part of the invading Iraq."

"I think the administration is at the very least keeping its options open."

Iraqis are also suspicious. According to a recent poll, 80% believe the US intends to retain a permanent presence in Iraq, regardless of whether the Iraqi government asked the US to leave.

full article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4834032.stm

edit: no question

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

sweetheart

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Mar-30-06 09:46 AM
Response to Original message

1. theft

The army needs to steal some iraqi assets to
fill the bankrupt hole left by its ill advised imperial romp.
The bases will allow them to secure teh booty their
in the process of stealing, if they can quell the rebellion
enough to finish the job of grand-theft-oil.

It is a brilliant strategy, the white colonial man's way,
to war in to another nation, and steal its stuff, and then
the stolen-from are angry and powerless, raped and robbed.

Then keep some bases nearby so you can always fly back in
and fuck them up, just in case they get uppity and dispute
the property rights of military theft.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

noamnety

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Mar-30-06 09:46 AM
Response to Original message

2. We're building the infrastructure in Iraq

So we don't have to build it at home.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Jacobin

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Mar-30-06 09:48 AM
Response to Original message

3. Its For those permanent bases that we are NOT building

because 'we want to leave Iraq just as soon as we can'(tm)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

sinkingfeeling

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Mar-30-06 09:52 AM
Response to Original message

4. Well it's because of the 14 big permanent bases we're building to

stay in Iraq for the next 100 years or until the end of time, whichever comes first.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

hippiechick

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Mar-30-06 09:52 AM
Response to Original message

5. Third Party Contractors ...

... Halliburton, Bechtel, Carlyle, Lockheed ... etc etc etc ... not a damn bit of it going to TROOPS ... :mad:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

bigtree

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Mar-30-06 10:42 AM
Response to Original message

6. .

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Sun May 12th 2024, 04:17 AM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.