By Kenneth J. Theisen
On Tuesday, at least a dozen
people were killed in Sadr City section of Baghdad alone, as the torrent
of violence that has torn at Iraq since the U.S. invaded Iraq 5 years
ago continued.
On the same day, the Bush Regime
continued another brazen display of war mongering, threats, and lies
known euphemistically as a “congressional hearing”. The top U.S.
military butcher, General David Petraeus, and the Ambassador and pro-consul
to Iraq, Ryan Crocker, appeared before the U.S. Senate to argue the
Bush regime case for the continued occupation of Iraq.
The two Bush regime henchmen
argued that the escalation of the war by the Bush administration has
resulted in what they called “progress”. By “progress”, these
war criminals mean establishing, through a brutal military occupation,
a modicum of “stability” that enables them to pursue their imperialist
interests more aggressively in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East
and Central Asia. But referring to recent violence in Baghdad and Basra,
Petraeus stated that “the progress made since last spring is still
fragile and reversible.” Both Petraeus and Crocker cautioned that
Congress and the American people should be patient and that troop withdrawals
should be temporarily suspended, allowing the Bush regime to have at
least 10,000 additional troops in Iraq through the remainder of the
Bush tenure – more than were there before the so-called surge was instituted.
Congress Goes Along
Petraeus and Crocker ran into
some minor critiquing from various Senators. But the essential lesson
of these “hearings” was that the Bush Regime announced its intention
to continue the war, and the Senate was able to maintain the charade
of offering various concerns, objections, and criticisms, while changing
or even challenging absolutely nothing about the Bush/Cheney plan.
Republican Senator Richard
Lugar stated, “Simply appealing for more time to make progress
is insufficient.” He went on to say what is already apparent to
even the most obtuse Senators: “Iraq will be an unstable country for
the foreseeable future.” He further stated that it must be determined
“whether the administration has a definable political strategy”
to end the war. Other Republican senators including John Warner, Robert
Corker, and George Voinovich expressed similar doubts about the “success”
in Iraq. Voinovich said that the war is “bankrupting our country.”
He also stated we need to “show with some urgency that we are on
our way out.
But presidential contender
Senator John McCain, a supporter of the escalated Iraq war said the
U.S. must not to “choose to lose.” He further stated, “We’re
no longer staring into the abyss of defeat, and we can now look ahead
to the genuine prospect of success.” Other Bush regime supporters
in the Senate agreed.
On the other side of the political
aisle, Hillary stated, “If this were easy, or if there were a very
clear way forward, we could all perhaps agree on the facts about how
to build toward a resolution that is in the best interest of the United
States, that would stabilize Iraq and would meet our other challenges
around the world.” She called for a gradual withdrawal from Iraq.
Given that she has previously refused to have troops out by January
2013, this would indeed be a “gradual withdrawal.
Obama has also refused to pledge
to remove all troops in his first term if he is elected. He referred
to the “the parade of horribles” that could arise if the U.S.
removes its forces from Iraq, apparently justifying continued U.S. occupation.
He appeared to say U.S. troops could only withdraw “When Iraq gets
to a point that it can carry forward its further development without
a major commitment of U.S. forces, with still a lot of problems out
there but a fair certitude that they can drive forward themselves without
significant danger that the whole thing slips away from them again,
clearly our profile can diminish markedly.” Just when Iraq will
get to that point, Obama left unaddressed.
Threats Against Iran
In their joint appearance,
Petraeus and Crocker’s testimony also built a case for carrying the
war to Iran. Petraeus accused Iran of causing unrest in Iraq, by infiltrating
Quds forces and supplying weapons to various Shiite militias. Petraeus
argued “The special groups [the U.S. military refers to Iranian
influenced fighters as Special Groups]… have the expertise to shoot
rockets more accurately, shoot mortars more accurately, and to employ
some of the more advanced material — the explosively formed projectiles
and the like — that have not just killed our soldiers and Iraqi soldiers,
but also have been used to assassinate two southern governors in past
months and two southern police chiefs.” He referred to the “higher
level of training and weaponry” of the special groups as proving
Iranian influence. He stated that coalition forces have focused their
efforts on the “Iranian-backed special groups.” He also claimed
that Iraqi and coalition leaders have expressed the desire that Iran
stop support for these “extremist groups,” but that Iran continues
to interfere in Iraq. He stated, “We should all watch Iranian actions
closely in the weeks and months ahead, as they will show the kind of
relationship Iran wishes to have with its neighbor and the character
of future Iranian involvement in Iraq .”
Crocker stated the Iranians
seek a “Lebanonization” of Iraq with their used of terrorists
who have the goal of destabilizing the nation. He said the U.S. is aware
of Iranian-supported extremist networks in Iraq .
The comments of Petraeus and
Crocker echo a recent statement of Representative Ike Skelton, the Democrat
chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. Earlier this month,
the London Telegraph quoted Skelton as saying, “Iran is the bull in
the china shop. In all of this, they seem to have links to all of the
Shi’ite groups, whether they be political or military.” The Bush
regime and Skelton all are making the case that the lack of irreversible
success in Iraq is largely the fault of Iran .
While on the surface some of
the comments made by senators and other members of the House this week
have been critical of the Bush regime action in Iraq, the bottom line
is that Congress continues to fund the war. I heard no comments from
any of the critical Republicans or leading Democrats stating that they
would force a withdrawal by cutting off funds. No one in leadership
has called for the impeachment of Bush and Cheney for their war crimes
and other crimes against humanity.
And as pointed out above, the
case for war against Iran continues to be made by the Bush regime and
even by leaders among the Democrats. We should have no illusions. The
Bush regime has made it clear that there will be no withdrawal of a
significant number of troops from Iraq during this year. And if you
read all the caveats that Obama and Clinton attach to their “ending
the war” statements, there will not be if they are elected either.
A Democrat-controlled Congress
has shown it will keep this war going. They have proved that over and
over by financing the war. And unless stopped, continuing moves towards
war with Iran will also continue. The Bush regime this month has announced
increased troops for Afghanistan. How many wars are enough for this
regime? How much more will you allow to occur in the quest for “success”
or to “guarantee security?” Success and security for U.S.
imperialism are not in the interests of the people of the world.
Ken Theisen is a veteran
activist of movements opposing U.S. imperialism, its wars and domination
of countries throughout the world, and an advocate against domestic
violence in the San Francisco Bay Area.