Reply #24: Bush's unity is a protection pact forced on Iraqis by the chaotic state

[bigtree]

our military invasion and occupation has created. Bush wants to sidestep responsibility for his idiotic plan to remove the controlling authority and replace them with another group of U.S. compliant cronies. He's stretched them out just so far that their very lives are dependent on his protection. To see them bowing and scraping to Bush and the occupying soldiers after his phone call was sickening. It's not hard to get your hostages to perform for the public.

Unity's not such a great thing if it's coerced. Saddam demanded unity behind his regime as he suppressed the very same folks who have just ascended to power, the Kurds and the Shiites. The U.S. kept them sectioned off from Saddam's forces with our bombers.

Bush tried to be clever with his chaos or unity crap, but what this Texas loser really expects is for the Iraqi population to go along with his disaster as if we hadn't invaded and bombed them back into the pre-industrial age, as if the new authority's U.S. backed military was somehow neutral and supreme, and all opposed are insurgent. Bush can posture, but he's the alien in Iraq, he's the infidel.

He and his cohorts will do anything they can to justify their continuing presence there. Look what they're doing in Iran with that $75m to undermine their 'elected' government. There was that bombing that the Brits were blamed by the locals for. Did the Brits do it? Who knows?

But, we do know that they are in league with Bush as he openly encourages the subversion of Iran's sovereign government. We do know that Negroponte cites Iran's oil alliances as undermining U.S. aims as he complains about Iran's military capability that he admits, is for border defense against foreign invasion. Is it business or national security? Neither Iraq or Iran ever threatened the U.S..

But, some still want to see proof of our subversions . . .