polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 3
rd, 2016 at 11:27am:
The "proof" is seen in the immediate moves by the occupying forces to 1. enact a wholesale transfer of Iraqi economic and political sovereignty over to US private companies, and 2. set up the political institutions to ensure it would stay that way (ie the faux election system). It shouldn't need mentioning that without economic or political sovereignty - enforced by a foreign occupier - there is no democracy.
Or do you honestly think that in a genuine democracy the Iraqi people would happily vote to have their resources and assets run and controlled by foreign companies for foreign companies? Or that having meticulously set up such a "neoliberal utopia" with 140 thousand occupying troops to enforce it, the US would happily stand by and let a democratic Iraqi government dismantle this setup and start distributing their wealth to the Iraqi people instead of letting them go offshore?
The "proof" that the US fought "tooth and nail" to deprive Iraqis of sovereignty, and therefore their democracy, is staring at you in the face - the Bremer edicts that systematically transformed Iraq's mostly state-based banking and industry sectors into private US corporations - run entirely by, and for US corporations; then the efforts to ban anything resembling proper democratic processes that would threaten this economic colonialism - the banning of local councils, the banning of a democratic preselection process thus forcing the Iraqis to "vote" between a selection of regime-friendly candidates, and then embedding US "advisors" into every government ministry, with full oversight from the massive US embassy (the biggest in the world) - ensuring all but complete US control over government policy.
The "proof" is also in the handpicked candidates Uncle went into Iraq with. Here's Wikipedia on Chalabi, Uncle's first presidential candidate before they fell out:
Quote:Before the Iraq War (2003), Chalabi enjoyed close political and business relationships with some members of the U.S. government, including some prominent neoconservatives within the Pentagon. Chalabi was said to have had political contacts within the Project for the New American Century, most notably with Paul Wolfowitz, a student of nuclear strategist Albert Wohlstetter, and Richard Perle. He also enjoyed considerable support among politicians and political pundits in the United States, most notably Jim Hoagland of The Washington Post, who held him up as a notable force for democracy in Iraq.[21] He was a special guest of First Lady Laura Bush at the 2004 State of the Union Address.[22]
Here's Wikipedia on Allawi:
Quote:On May 28, 2004, he was elected unanimously by the Governing Council to be the Interim Prime Minister of Iraq to govern the country beginning with the United States' handover of sovereignty (June 30, 2004) until national elections, scheduled for early 2005. Although many believe the decision was reached largely on the advice of United Nations special envoy to Iraq, Lakhdar Brahimi, the New York Times reported that Brahimi only endorsed him reluctantly after pressure from U.S. officials. (In response to a question about the role of the U.S. in Allawi's appointment, Brahimi replied: “I sometimes say, I'm sure he doesn't mind me saying that, Bremer is the dictator of Iraq. He has the money. He has the signature. Nothing happens without his agreement in this country.”[15]) Two weeks later, Brahimi announced his resignation, due to "great difficulties and frustration".[16]
FD obviously sees democracy as the process of invading another country with a list of ready-made candidates, then working through the messy process of getting them elected.
No worries. The big story of Iraq, as you've said, is the contracts. Iraq is an oil-rich state. Today, after "democracy", it brings in big bucks for Uncle's friends, many of whom are close personal friends of George Bush and Dick Cheney.
Cunning, no? When the oil contracts were finally announced in about 2010, if I remember rightly, US firms were notably absent. Uncle, of course, had to be careful. There was that nasty rumour that he went into Iraq for the oil. The process was carefully tendered, with the bulk of the contracts going to French and a Malaysian company. Sounds fair, no?
No. The
real money goes to the engineering and construction companies, Dick Cheney's friend Haliburton being the most notorious. These contracts go for 30 years or more. Pipelines, oil exploration, reconstruction, property development. A number of big-earning contractors simply do research and development plans. The bills go to Uncle, Uncle charges Iraq. These are the real spoils of war - spoils Saddam was being difficult with. Can you believe it? Saddam wanted the contracts to stay with
his friends. Corrupt, no?
Yes, all Uncle wanted to do was bring democracy to Iraq. I just wish FD would tell us how.
freediver wrote on Feb 2
nd, 2016 at 6:58pm:
You claimed that the US fought tooth and nail against democracy. Prove it. If you want to get into the details of whether there were sufficient freedoms for democracy to function properly then I am happy to discuss that, but there is not much point while you maintain such a ludicrous position.
Sounds like he won't tell us until you change such a "ludicrous" position, G. Any chance you could agree with FD?
Forum
Pages: 
moral equivalence of supporting ISIS vs US (Read 12964 times)
