The most important statement in the news conference was

The transition to sovereignty also requires an atmosphere of security, and our coalition is working to provide that security...As we've made clear all along, our commitment to the success and security of Iraq will not end on June 30th. On July 1st and beyond, our reconstruction assistance will continue and our military commitment will continue...In terms of how long we'll be there, as long as necessary, and not one day more. The Iraqi people need us there to help with security. They need us there to fight off these, you know, violent few, who are doing everything they can to resist the advance of freedom. And I mentioned who they are...Once we transfer sovereignty, we'll enter into a security agreement with the government to which we pass sovereignty, the entity to which we pass sovereignty. And we'll need to be there for a while.
---GWB, April 13, 2004, aqvailable here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-3974626,00.html

Thanks to davekriss

As we laugh and despair over the embarrassing shit for brains that sits in the Oval Office, his minions are arranging for the US to establish a permanent military presence in Iraq. No one is asking about that! He's basically advertising it, and no one even seems to notice it.

This is the PNAC's objective. Dominating Iraq is just the first step in their plan to dominate the entire Middle East. Read it if you want to know what comes next.

He also said a couple of times something about:

our "historic opportunity to change the world"


like he was trying to talk everyone into it - buy into it.

If you want to know what a SOFA is, you can read about them in Chalmers Johnson's book, I think it's called The Sorrows of Empire. In the meantime, if you don't have the book handy, just think of the 99 year lease, renewable at our discretion, that we have for Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.

Follow my logic people.

Soldiers remain right? Either way our kids will be there fighting and killing and dying.

Well instead of being stuck politically Kerry has an out.

If he cannot get UN support, he does something (anything really) big militarily and/or in reference to completing a big infrastructure project.

Then he says we did this and that and they have power. Ok, now we leave.

Then he gets the hell out of dodge.


+

Read Bush*'s words in my original post. The "govt" that takes over on June 30 is the same govt Bush* is going to negotiate a SOFA with. It's also a govt that Bush* is in the process of hand-picking. Notice how he isn't saying one word about who is going to be in this new sovereign govt.

:scared:

and it will be a RED one too. Pub that is.....

uhmm... make that "black death" for everyone. I don't mean that * has launched a plague. But it's a damn good booster shot for killing. You know, HATE - the self destructive emotion that keeps on giving and breeding and is totally unforgiving and without compromise.

In that spirit I have to flip off this candy pants POTUS imposter. I hope he reaps what he sows. In the meantime, I hope the WORLD will survive.

"Earth gape open wide and eat him quick."

"I also know that there's an historic opportunity here to change the world. And it's very important for the loved ones of our troops to understand that the mission is an important, vital mission for the security of America and for the ability to change the world for the better..."

Mr. Bush is way in over his head....

He's getting EXACTLY what he and the PNACers want - a permanent military presence in Iraq.

"Journalists " come home, "Iraqi Freedon" logos get removed from news programs - it becomes the other unreported war (like Afghanistan)

You have indeed put your finger to the most important statement made in that dismal display. It is not news, of course, as it has been said before, but this is doubtless the widest circulation it has yet had.

The "sovereign" Iraqi government the administration plans to create will exist for two purposes only: to "invite" U.S. forces to remain in Iraq for whatever time the administration desires these to remain, and to "legitimize" contracts and bills of sale giving U.S. corporations allied to the administration possession and profit from Iraqi national properties.

This is why it is of no moment to these reptiles that they cannot even name just now who or what sovereignty will be transfered to: the whole thing is merely an exercise in puppetry, and neither personalities nor structures will matter.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

whether there's a functioning gov't or a battle royale by June. What matters is that our presence in Iraq is inextricable come November, whether Kerry or their boy wins the WH. If it's a bloody quagmire, it's good. If the country is tamed for corporate pickings, even better. What they can't abide is having their grand plans for the ME thwarted by our leaving Iraq. Ever.

Bush* didn't even need to be asked about it. The most secretive admin in my lifetime volunteers the information and no one notices.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

it was an occupation. Ironic, huh?

by Dec. 2005.

sorry no link, just the news report. Anyone else hear this?

that's December, 2005.


dp

or was the *moron implying 2004?

edit: thread afterall,
dp

He said elections would be held no later than Jan 2005.

is BS otherwise. There's another 18 months until 'democracy' is in place in Iraq.

the kill rate will be astounding in the meantime.
dp

"According to the schedule already approved by the Governing Council, Iraq will hold elections for a national assembly no later than next January. That assembly will draft a new permanent constitution, which will be presented to the Iraqi people in a national referendum held in October of next year."

"Iraqis will then elect a permanent government by December 15, 2005 -- an event that will mark the completion of Iraq's transition from dictatorship to freedom."

He said June 30, 2004, and another date I can't remember but it was in between the two. He was defining process points. I think that Dec 05 was when he mentioned that the flag of free Iraq would be hoisted. Wonder what they have in mind for the flag?

From the speech:

"Iraqis will then elect a permanent government by December 15, 2005 — an event that will mark the completion of Iraq's transition from dictatorship to freedom."

Still though, I seem to remember that during the Q&A he said no later than January 2005.

June 30 will be one of the most memorable smoke and mirrors dates in recent memory.

I think he used the word "country". I wonder if he realizes he just described the way rational people view the secrecy of his own administration...

This is an example of why they don't like to let him answer unscripted questions.

they have come out and said so?

over the head in campaign advertisements atleast.

Wait for all the photos of him looking down sadly 'in thought' (or trying to tune in his earpiece) when he was asked about never admitting to a mistake and 'did he want to admit just one right now.'

His intended theater was to be upbeat and resolute. The old Positivism.

But the cameras went off like an angry wasp's nest when he stood there looking down and looking lost for sooooo...long. So long!

The public senses that there are many things going wrong.

If the thief-executive says everything is as it should be because he wouldn't have done anything different, you have a logical (and excusable for Repubs) reason to change horses.

Pride cometh before a fall.

I could barely restrain myself from attacking the TV. But I know that the average Joe and Jill will think he did a fine job and is just a wonderful guy.

I wonder when Kerry will decide to begin the campaign?

forever was the most telling part.

We are there to stay, according to Bush and the PNAC.

This will be our presence for the imposition of democracy in the Middle East...puppet democracy at the point of a gun.

fourteen permanent bases.

:kick:

What Bush seems to think it means.

It was somewhat of a quiet announcement yet I believe many are aware of the closure. I just assumed most reached the same conclusion that the US will maintain a permanent military presence in Iraq. I yammered about it on a different board with a repub who, btw, didn't disagree and took the position of "and your point is?"

if you were to ask the avg American if they wanted us to establish a permanent presence in Iraq, they would say no. That's why no one talks about it

Sorry I read it that you meant Duers. No one talks about the Mark 77 used at the beginning of the war, I'm totally digressing, or course. But it goes to show the deception surrounding the pre-war actions, beginning, middle and blatant fact that if bush* remains in office no end to this criminal war.
I'm still POed about the Mark 77 denial then retraction from the government.
I don't understand why no one is talking about the EO which gives a free pass to contracting firms operating in Iraq from potential lawsuits filed by employees. Especially in light of the Falluja incident and the kidnapping of Hamil, the diary farmer desperate for cash. I believe it's 13303. It's the opportune time to bring this one to light.

Why are all of the middle eastern countries so darned SILENT about all of this.

None of them dig Israel. We are Israel's only reason for being in existence today. A military presence in Iraq only HELPS Israel to dig in.

The ME countries KNOW we want military dominance over there. They know the PNAC wants syria and iran's heads. And who knows who else's.

The ME seems to be getting really cozy with Russia (Iran, SA, Syria, perhaps more)

The ME knows we would love to control OPEC... and now we will in effect get a seat at the table via Iraq.

The PEOPLE in the ME seem to uniformely oppose US imperialism... are the monarchies really so insulated and feel so safe that they can oppose 90% of their people for the longterm?

I am baffled as to WHY the ME countries tolerate American aggression and imprerialism!!! Really baffled. They are selling their people right down the river by allowing the US shenanigans to persist and expand!