Understanding News Stories About Iraq

The reports coming out of Iraq are confused, confusing, and seem to be in direct opposition to the reports we were getting two weeks ago. Are timelines being imposed? Is the Iraqi government in agreement with the US government? Is the Iraqi government in charge? Are fewer American soldiers needed? Are more American soldiers being deployed? Are we winning? Are we losing? There are only two things you need to know: 1) The Bush administration always lies. 2) Nothing about Iraq is about Iraq. It’s the nature of the Bush administration to lie. Lying is the only thing that can be counted on regarding the current White House. It’s a congenital condition that was present at the birth of the Bush administration. From now until November 4, 2008, all stories coming out of Iraq will have American elections as a subtext. The war in Iraq has lost all importance except in relation to winning or losing elections. For instance, Iraq’s Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki just said, “I am Washington’s friend but not America’s man in Iraq.” Maliki is not Washington’s friend; he is the White House bitch. And whether Maliki is America’s man in Iraq or not is a fine point. The Bush administration’s Ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad is America’s man in Iraq. And Khalilzad handpicked Maliki to be prime minister of Iraq. If the GOP feels that an independent Iraq will garner more votes for Republicans in upcoming elections, then Maliki will act accordingly. Whatever Maliki is saying about “this is an elected government and no one has the right to set a timetable for it,” is boloney. These words came out of Maliki’s mouth as a response to the White House idea that timetables could be a means of keeping civil war at bay in Iraq. Proposing timetables is boloney. American officials handed out a list of deadlines for legislative and executive actions. They call their list “a notional political timetable”. The timetable runs from September 2006 through March 2007. Khalilzad said Maliki had been consulted when it was drawn up. But Iraq is already in a civil war. The idea of timetables is a sop to voters who think it has to do with a date for getting our soldiers out of Iraq. These benchmarks, or timetables have nothing whatsoever to do with pulling our soldiers out of Iraq. They don’t have anything to do with anything remotely concerned with reality. They are only useful as talking points during election years. Maliki’s little temper tantrum is boloney. The notional (whatever that means) political timetable is boloney. The idea that there is a rift between Washington and the Iraqi government is boloney. Since the Bush administration always lies, it follows that the puppet government that the Bush administration set up in Iraq always lies. The facts are that the White House doesn’t want Iraq to run its own government because the GOP wants to call the shots in Iraq for the foreseeable future. There is a civil war going on right now in Iraq, which is fine by the White House. Civil war in Iraq ensures that the war the Republicans started in 2003 will keep on keepin’ on and will have rich Republicans in clover for years and years. The neocons love war, the Carlyle Group loves war, Halliburton loves war, Cheney loves war (and torture), the Pentagon loves war, Wall Street loves war, Homeland Security loves war, the little putzes in power who have never been in the military love war. Do you and I love war? No. Do we matter? No. (This was originally posted on October 28th, but because Blogger/Google have had their collective heads up their ass and have been screwing up every Blogger blog for the last week this is posted under an October 29 date.)