Is it really Democracy?

[Toots]

On a 104 acre site along the Tigris River in Baghdad, a Kuwaiti construction company remains on schedule to complete the new $593 million US Embassy in Iraq. The completely self-sustaining compound of 21 buildings will be the largest and most secure Embassy in the world. What's behind the need for such a complex, and why is it not being discussed in the American news media? As it literally and symbolically towers over the halls of the Iraqi Parliament, the question is: Who will be governing Iraq, their President or ours?
During pResident Bush*'s visit to Iraq in June, President Jalal Talibani and Vice-President Tariq al-Hashimi requested a time line for the withdrawal of foreign forces. A few days later Iraq's national security adviser Mowaffak al-Rubaie wrote in a Washington Post opinion piece, "The removal of foreign troops will legitimize Iraq's government in the eyes of it's people." Then a draft of a 28-point reconciliation plan developed by the Iraqi government was published. It also included a UN approved time line for the withdrawal of all foreign troops. But the final proposal released on June 26, this and three other measures were excluded: a halt to US operations against insurgent strongholds, general amnesty for all armed Iraqi resistance groups and compensation for victims of multi-national forces.
The 28-point plan had it's origins last November in a conference in Cairo where Iraqi delegates representing it's three main religious factions met for three days. The conference was supported by the United Nations, the European Union, the Arab League and the Organization of the Islamic Conference. Our government was conspicuously absent.
Given the constant drum beating by our government in opposition to setting a timetable, it seems that the Iraqi government is only as Democratic as the US government permits it to be. But how valid is the argument that defining a departure date will empower the insurgency to wait and take over after we leave? Wouldn't the Iraqis ask us to return if conditions there didn't stabilize?
Isn't it reasonable to believe the Iraqis understand the nature of the insurgency better than we do? Consider how badly Bush*'s stay-the-course message has lost it's power when he admits that American troops will not leave during his Presidency. The influence, or lack of interest, by the US government on Iraqi proposals shouldn't be viewed with the arrogance that America knows what's best. Instead we should be looking to understand what other actions support or contradict the Administration's stated objectives.
As early as April 2004 it was reported in the New York Times that US engineers were focusing on the design of six to fourteen "enduring" military bases for American troops. Language in the 2005 supplemental budget request by the pResident and approved by Congress stated some of the hundreds of millions of dollars of base construction funds were for " in some very limited cases, permanent facilities".
In June, measures approved by both houses of Congress to ensure that our troops do not permanently occupy military bases in Iraq were removed from the legislation by the Senate-House conference committee without serious debate. These facts suggest a long term military presence was planned a long time ago. In any other place in the world, America would condemn a military occupancy in a nation where the elected leaders asked for an end to offensive military operations and a firm commitment to withdraw those troops. We would use other terms to describe the influence of a foreign government and their forces and democracy would not be among them. So as the massive US Embassy takes shape and US troops remain there in "enduring bases" we built, it's time all American citizens become throughly informed about the details of this occupation. We need to ask our government why we are still in Iraq, because if it's not Iraqi's democracy, then it's not democracy at all. And if we aren't involved, how do we claim our democracy is one "of the people"?

[acmejack]

1. What is the difference from the Warsaw Pact Countries?

The "Russian Satellite Nations" as we derisively referred to them. None to my admittedly jaundiced eye. I had thought your question must refer to this Country, the people here have expressed strong opposition to any lasting presence in Iraq. We have been assured we would have none, despite the fourteen bases being common knowledge. This is the standard MO, tell us one thing, do the opposite.

Is this how a democracy operates? Is this how the United States is supposed to work? We are a rogue nation, accountable to no one, most especially the Citizens-those people who supposedly run the place.

[Toots]

2. I worked hard on this it deserves another shot

:kick: