Not a Comfy SOFA
"We Do Bad Things to Bad People"--T-shirt for the "Bush Hogs,"
3 Bn 20th Special Forces Group (Abn.) [AL]
Democracy and capitalism are the two great pillars
of the American idea.
To have rocked one of those pillars
may be regarded as a misfortune.
To have damaged the reputation of both, at home and abroad,
is a pretty stunning achievement for an American president
--Boris Johnson, U.K. Telegraph
There's been a load of compromisin'
On the road to my horizon
But I'm gonna be where the lights are shinin' on me
--Rhinestone Cowboy, Glen Campbell
________________
In "Bush Team Pushes Hard for Iraq Security Deal" we read,
The Bush administration has launched a top-level lobbying campaign to persuade skeptical U.S. lawmakers and disapproving Iraqi politicians to support a security agreement governing the continued presence of American troops in Iraq.
Although congressional approval is not legally required U.S. lawmakers' support is considered crucial for an agreement to go forward. In Iraq, where the deal must pass through several complex layers of approval, the going is considered even tougher.
If Congressional approval is not needed to ratify this Status of Forces of treaty, then is the U.S. still a constitutional democracy?
Is Iraq a country? The U.S.? Is an agreement between countries not a "treaty"? Are treaties not to be ratified by Congress?
In Slate's "Bush's Final Illusion -- the President's Agreement with Iraq Bypasses Congress. Again," writers Ackerman and Hathaway accuse Bush of making an unconstitutional claim to the unilateral right to commit the U.S. to his agreement. Why are members of this Congress behaving like they are presidential lapdogs? Do they get special rhinestone collars for this?
General Ray Odierno accused Iran of bribing Iraqi parliamentary members to reject the SOFA pact when it comes up for a vote (A Critical Stage in Iraq.) How does one decide the difference in degrees of criminality when one takes the hubristic stance of accusing another of criminal malfeasance? Surely bribing a parliament is bad.
But how about bypassing their authority entirely?
Labels: bush bypasses congress in seeking passage of SOFA, iraq SOFA, phony war on terror, PWOT, status of forces with iraq
posted by rangeragainstwar at 6:15 AM
7 Comments:
to say nothing of the fact that the "government" in iraq is nothing but a sham. a puppet regime beholding to and created by the invaders. they are as big a governmental farce as the karzai quisling regime in afghanistan.
If you die first,
We're splitting up your gear.
the unofficial motto of team 2.
It's not like there's any mystery here; we're doing the usual Great Power dirty work in the imperial hustings. The dissonance comes from trying to sell this to the Great Unwashed, who still view our armed force through the lens of 1945, where the GIs liberated people and smashed the Bad Guys.
Imperial policing is hard, nasty business done in the dark. You can't democritize it or sanitize it. It involves killing and disappearing and imprisoning people in their own countries for the crime of fighting us for being there. The relative virtues and vices of these people are immaterial; when it comes to fighting foreign invaders the difference between your Mookie al Sadrs and your Mohandas Ghandis are in degree, not in fundamentals.
So of COURSE this thing has been secretive and illegal. How the hell else does it happen.
ISTM that we're arguing about the details and missing the big picture. Either we're in someone else's country as their ally and, by the nature of the thing, subordinate to their political and military leadership as Rochambau was to the Continental Congress and Washington - or we're there as an imperial force, a seperate, external power player.
Do we really want to "help" the Iraqis? Then we need to choose what's behind Door #1.
Do we want imperial victory? Dorr #2.
Or...we can choose Door #3 - get the fuck out, and let the Iraqis fight their Civil War. OR not - whatever. And then deal with the winners.
I know which option I think would work.
If Congressional approval is not needed to ratify this Status of Forces of treaty, then is the U.S. still a constitutional democracy?
Easy question to answer. Not pleasant, but very easy.
No.
It isn't.
MB,
Can i have your Rolex and K bar? jim
FDChief,
You touch a key and salient point-my cmts often are aimed at the little crap and ignore the bigger picture.I present the small stuff to try to illum the bigger pic which i have a hard time understanding.One thing is fact - it's all a lie, from H hour to present.
I,ve done a follow on to this piece b/c it needs some additional cmts. jim
stormcrow,
now you've gone and ruined my weekend.:) jim
to say nothing of the fact that the "government" in iraq is nothing but a sham. a puppet regime beholding to and created by the invaders
"Created by", yes.
"Beholden to", no. Not if al Maliki wants any access to power, or, for that matter, even the privilege of continued breathing once the US is gone.
He doesn't have the leadership of a large popular base, the way al Sadr does.
So his only shot at legitimacy in a post-occupation Iraq is obvious and public opposition to that occupation. Events suggest he knows this very well indeed.
Note al Maliki's continuing pushback against the sort of SOFA the neocons favor. I think you're noticed this yourself. We'll announce a SOFA "negotiated" with the al Maliki regime, complete with American bases in Iraq well into the early spring of 7841 AD.
Then, the next week, the results of those "negotiations" somehow get unstuck.
Post a Comment
<< Home