For those wondering why Rumsfeld is closing all those military bases,

[Cleita]

could this be the reason?

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/iraq-intro.htm

Iraq Facilities

A 20 April 2003 report in The New York Times asserted that "the U.S. is planning a long-term military relationship with the emerging government of Iraq, one that would grant the Pentagon access to military bases and project American influence into the heart of the unsettled region." The report, citing anonymous sources, referred to one base at Baghdad's international airport, another near Al-Nasiriyah in the south , the third at the H-1 airstrip in the western desert, and the fourth at Bashur AB in the north.

There had been several statements at that time about the possible duration of the US military presence in Iraq. Mr. Richard Perle mentioned six months; Ahmad Chalabi, two years.

American officials have tried to make the point that the US presence in Iraq will not be a permanent or long-term one. US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in a 21 April 2003 press conference said that any suggestion that the United States is planning a permanent military presence in Iraq is "inaccurate and unfortunate." Rumsfeld said "I have never, that I can recall, heard the subject of a permanent base in Iraq discussed in any meeting. ... The likelihood of it seems to me to be so low that it does not surprise me that it's never been discussed in my presence, to my knowledge. Why do I say it's low? Well, we've got all kinds of options and opportunities in that part of the world to locate forces, it's not like we need a new place. We have plenty of friends and plenty of ability to work with them and have locations for things that help to contribute to stability in the region. ... Rumsfeld: I think there is a down side. I think any impression that is left, which that article left, that the United States plans some sort of a permanent presence in that country, I think is a signal to the people of that country that's inaccurate and unfortunate, because we don't plan to function as an occupier, we don't plan to prescribe to any new government how we ought to be arranged in their country."

On 23 March 2004 it was reported that "U.S. engineers are focusing on constructing 14 "enduring bases," long-term encampments for the thousands of American troops expected to serve in Iraq for at least two years.... The number of U.S. military personnel in Iraq, between 105,000 and 110,000, is expected to remain unchanged through 2006.. the US plans to operate from former Iraqi bases in Baghdad, Mosul, Taji, Balad, Kirkuk and in areas near Nasiriyah, near Tikrit, near Fallujah and between Irbil and Kirkuk... enhance airfields in Baghdad and Mosul..."

more.....

Seems they are going to need troops and personnel on all those bases.

[lildreamer316]

1. Maybe it's the OIL.

Ya THINK??????????

[Cleita]

2. Well considering the bases are protecting the oil facilities

and pipelines, it would seem that's it.

[lildreamer316]

9. BTW thanks for the post.

Wasn't trying to be snippy; sorry if that's the way it came across.

[Cleita]

12. I didn't consider your post snippy because you are right.

It's about protecting their oil at the expense of our at home security.

[Cleita]

13. ...

:kick:

[havocmom]

8. That and neocon secruity which is enhanced by keeping trained warriors

far from the homeland, lest they decide to liberate America from the Corporate Forces which now have control of it.

There was that little tidbit last week about commanders of high rank in Iraq having body gruards that are private corporation contract employees. I would think most generals would have the people sense to pick a loyal group of personal guards from the ranks of their own personnel. Private contractors are not a wall against fragging as was hinted, but assurance commanders follow the orders of the people who are really in charge.

As troops are stretched abroad in manufactured wars, look for more and more use of Private Security here in the homeland. And expect more ransome notes from Halliburton for the care of your kin in uniform.

[annabanana]

3. This IS part of the PNAC game plan, right?

I don't think anyone should be surprised by this.

[Stephanie]

7. Yes it is - remaking the ME, and establishing bases to move forward

toward Korea & China. Also there is a need to move our military out of Saudi Arabia.

[w8liftinglady]

4. He let it slip during his address..

That he planned to use the soldiers at the closed facilities in Iraq.

[Atman]

5. BushCo has contracts with Halliburton & Bechtel

We simply cannot leave Iraq until those contracts are fulfilled.

It's only business.

[theboss]

6. That's probably part of it

But I don't see any grand conspiracy in the base closures any more than I did during the 90s. Times change; our defense needs aren't the same.

[readmylips]

10. Goldmine real estate....rich repigs profit...

Elites want the real estate for profit. Rumpbutt, evil cheney and little bush sell America to the highest bitter. Fok the soldiers, this evil administration bosses will make billions.

[stillcool]

11. They are just protecting their assets....

..nothing much left here to protect.