and in Iraq the real plan hidden in the Katrina coverage

Published on Sunday, September 4, 2005 by the Toronto Sun
By Eric Margolis

The most important news from Iraq last week was not the much ballyhooed constitutional pact by Shias and Kurds, nor the tragic stampede deaths of nearly 1,000 pilgrims in Baghdad.

The U.S. Air Force's senior officer, Gen. John Jumper, stated U.S. warplanes would remain in Iraq to fight resistance forces and protect the American-installed regime "more or less indefinitely." Jumper's bombshell went largely unnoticed due to Hurricane Katrina.

Gen. Jumper let the cat out of the bag. While President George Bush hints at eventual troop withdrawals, the Pentagon is busy building four major, permanent air bases in Iraq that will require heavy infantry protection.

Jumper's revelation confirms what this column has long said: The Pentagon plans to copy Imperial Britain's method of ruling oil-rich Iraq. In the 1920s, the British cobbled together Iraq from three disparate Ottoman provinces to control newly-found oil fields in Kurdistan and along the Iranian border.

London installed a puppet king and built an army of sepoy (native) troops to keep order and put down minor uprisings. Government minister Winston Churchill authorized use of poisonous mustard gas against Kurdish tribesmen in Iraq and Pushtuns in Afghanistan (today's Taliban). The RAF crushed all revolts.

It seems this is what Jumper has in mind. Mobile U.S. ground intervention forces will remain at the four major "Fort Apache" bases guarding Iraq's major oil fields. These bases will be "ceded" to the U.S. by a compliant Iraqi regime. The U.S. Air Force will police the Pax Americana with its precision-guided munitions and armed drones.

The USAF has developed an extremely effective new technique of wide area control. Small numbers of strike aircraft are kept in the air around the clock. When U.S. ground forces come under attack or foes are sighted, these aircraft deliver precision-guided bombs. This tactic has led Iraqi resistance fighters to favour roadside bombs over ambushes against U.S. convoys.

The USAF uses the same combat air patrol tactic in Afghanistan, with even more success. The U.S. is also developing three major air bases in Pakistan, and others across Central Asia, to support its plans to dominate the region's oil and gas reserves.

While the USAF is settling into West Asia, the mess in Iraq continues to worsen. Last week's so-called "constitutional deal" was the long-predicted, U.S.-crafted pact between Shias and Kurds, essentially giving them Iraq's oil and virtual independence. The proposed constitution assures American big business access to Iraq's oil riches and markets.

The furious but powerless Sunnis were left in the lurch. Sunnis will at least have the chance to vote on it in a Oct. 15 referendum, but many fear it will be rigged.

The U.S. reportedly offered the 15 Sunni delegates $5 million each to vote for the constitution -- but was turned down. No mention was made that a U.S.-guided constitution for Iraq would violate the Geneva Conventions.

Chinese Taoists say you become what you hate. In a zesty irony, the U.S. now finds itself in a similar position as demonized Saddam Hussein. Saddam had to use his Sunni-dominated army to hold Iraq together by fighting Kurdish and Shia rebels. His brutal police jailed tens of thousands and routinely used torture.

Today, Iraq's new ruler, the U.S., is battling Sunni insurgents, ("al-Qaida terrorists," in the latest Pentagon doublespeak), rebuilding Saddam's dreaded secret police, holding 15,000 prisoners and torturing captives, as the Abu Ghraib outrage showed.

Much of the Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama National Guard were in Iraq last week week instead of at home. Meanwhile, the Kurds are de facto independent, the Shia are playing footsie with Iran, and large parts of Iraq resemble the storm-ravaged U.S. Gulf Coast -- or vice versa.

It was on After Downing Street

nt

if the US, to sustain itself, is so desperately in need of oil that we can't afford to buy it and can't drill for it on our own lands, then a great debate should be put before the American people ...

either we can use our military might to just take what we need or we need to find alternative fuel sources ... i think, or at least hope, that most Americans want to "play by the rules" and would not tolerate a military solution to our energy deficiencies ...

but of course, this debate never really happens ...

the reality is that US militarism overseas is NOT designed to benefit the American people at all ... it's purpose is to benefit BIG OIL ... and man are they benefitting ... virtually every big oil company is experiencing record profits as markets become more and more unstable due to the war in Iraq and other factors ...

if BIG OIL, with the US military acting on their behalf, is ultimately able to secure the Iraqi oil fields, the democracy advertised for Iraq will be nothing more than another cog in the great American empire ... the "profits before people" imperialists will make yet another notch in their belts and the American people will applaud bush's nation-building efforts ...

our mission, as a real opposition party, is to tell the truth about the REAL REASON we are in Iraq ... the current crop of Democrats seems absolutely unwilling to tell the truth ... their only comments focus around "energy independence" or bush's mishandling of "the strategy" ... their refusal to tell the truth is why they will ultimately fail ... they fail to point out the total corruption of our government and the invasive power of big oil in our foreign policy ... what's wrong with US policy in Iraq is that it is being prosecuted for the sole benefit of those raking in billions in profits ... if Democrats are too fearful to even identify the enemy and educate Americans of their crimes, what exactly is it they hope to accomplish ???