Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Iraq: 100 Days of Solidarity
This week marks the beginning of what is supposed to be the final 100 days of the U.S. occupation of Iraq. But if U.S. troops are to leave Iraq at the end of this year as promised – repeatedly – it will take grassroots pressure to counter the growing “occupy-Iraq-forever” chorus in Washington.
In spite of President Obama’s oft-repeated promises, his administration appears unwilling to withdrawal all U.S. troops, much less private contractors. Obama’s hand-picked Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta, has already endorsed a plan that would see 3,000 to 4,000 U.S. troops remain in Iraq indefinitely, ostensibly to “continue training security forces there.” (Tim Sloan, AFP/Getty Images)
Despite the fact that there is a Bush-era agreement with the Iraqi government to leave, despite the fact that the majority of Iraqis and Americans don’t support a continued U.S. presence, and despite the fact that Congress is supposedly in an all-out austerity mode, strong forces – including generals, war profiteers and hawks in both parties – are pushing President Obama to violate the agreement negotiated by his predecessor and keep a significant number of troops in Iraq past the December 31, 2011 deadline.
It’s true there has already been a major withdrawal of U.S. troops, from a high of 170,000 in 2007 to about 45,000 troops today (with most of the troops being sent over to occupy Afghanistan instead). That number, however, doesn’t tell the whole picture. As the New York Times notes, “Even as the military reduces its troop strength in Iraq, the C.I.A. will continue to have a major presence in the country, as will security contractors working for the State Department,” the latter to defend a U.S. embassy that's bigger than the Vatican.
Back in 2007, candidate Obama pledged that the first thing he’d do as president would be to withdraw our troops from Iraq. “I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank,” the future president declared. So far, the only thing many Americans can take to the bank, however, is evidence their home was fraudulently foreclosed upon.
In spite of President Obama’s oft-repeated promises, his administration appears unwilling to withdrawal all U.S. troops, much less private contractors. Obama’s hand-picked Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta, has already endorsed a plan that would see 3,000 to 4,000 U.S. troops remain in Iraq indefinitely, ostensibly to “continue training security forces there.” The senior commander in Iraq, meanwhile, is pushing to keep as many as 18,000 troops there. And U.S. lawmakers, both Republican and Democratic, are echoing the call to stay.
Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham recently predicted leaving only 3,000 troops behind would be a “formula for disaster.” Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein, meanwhile, warned it would be a mistake because Iraq was not yet fully secure. And in a FOX interview, Republican Sen. John McCain said, “I have talked to many military leaders who have specifically said around 13,000 troops would be a minimum. . . .I have never talked to a military leader that said that leaving only 3,000 is a good idea. I don't know who came up with this idea.”
Somebody ought to tell McCain who came up with the idea – not of leaving 3,000 troops, but leaving none: the Iraqis. Removing all U.S. troops by the end of this year was agreed to by the very government that the U.S. helped install. And it came as the result of popular pressure – the way democracy is supposed to work. The agreement was codified in a 2008 Security Agreement signed between Washington and Baghdad. And any change in that agreed-upon deadline is supposed to come only at the request of the Iraqi government. So far, with less than 100 days left, no such request has been made.
Iraqi leaders, even those who owe their positions to the U.S. occupiers, know it would be political suicide to come out publicly in favor of keeping U.S. troops. Most Iraqis hate the American invaders who launched an illegal war of aggression that has killed well over 100,000 Iraqis. They blame the U.S. for setting off a civil war that forced more than 4.7 million Iraqis to flee their homes, the majority to never return, and which resulted in the ethnic cleansing of Baghdad. A proud people, they feel humiliated by the presence of foreign troops and they will not forget the treatment that many of their fellow citizens received in American-run prisons. Indeed, tens of thousands of Iraqis have taken to the streets of Baghdad to demand that the foreign invaders leave.
After inflicting so much suffering on the Iraqi people, the least we can do here at home is support their call for our troops to leave. While some members of Congress are pressing Obama to keep the occupation going, others, spearheaded by Democratic Rep. Barbara Lee, are calling for an end to this shameful episode in our history. A coalition of peace groups ranging from Peace Action to Military Families Speak Out is also adding their “out now” voice.
“We are deeply troubled by recent reports that indicate your Administration is making plans to leave thousands of U.S. troops deployed in Iraq indefinitely,” the groups say in a letter to the president. “We are also troubled by the extraordinary buildup of private military contractors and untold numbers of intelligence operatives in Iraq. Mr. President the future of Iraq depends upon the Iraqi people, not the U.S. military. Now is the time to bring all of our brave men and women in uniform home, as promised.” They have asked all peace-loving Americans to flood the White House with messages. Call 202-456-1111.
Others are taking to the streets. On October 6, anti-war activists from around the nation will be gathering in Freedom Plaza in Washington, DC, to call for an end to both the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The protest will not be just for one day, but an on-going “people’s occupation” of the plaza to call for an end to U.S. military occupations. Come if you can, or just help spread the word if you can't.
Instead of passively accepting our government’s plans to extend the Iraq occupation indefinitely, let those who claim to represent your wishes in Washington know you'll stand for nothing less than a real, no-gimmicks end to a war and occupation that has wrecked all too many lives. And that’s a pledge they can take to the bank.
- Posted in


6 Comments so far
Show All"bring all our brave men and women home." You have obviously never served, Medea. The military ranks are choked with armed thugs, who, like cops here at home, follow orders, are heavily armed, and are morally depraved. The difference between security contractors and military personnel is their pay scale. A bullet in the head is a bullet in the head no matter who pulls the trigger. The ones who return without PTSD are the concern.
Yes...bring them all home now, but we must be very well prepared for an unknown number of psychological 'time bombs' as we have no idea and cannot predict the extent to which the negative effects of PTSD, full blown psychosis and depressive illness will affect ex-service people, thier families and communities. There aren't the facilites avaialbe to treat these people in an effective and timely manner, if they indeed choose to seek help. I would suggest too that the 'contractors' who have PTSD might be in such an advanced state of denial and on such a 'knife edge' could be the most risk. I agree too that those who DON'T have PTSD are a great concern because they most likely have lost the ability to act out compassion and have a low opinion of anyone who is not 'on our side'. The long term effects of these wars can't really begin to be imagined...even it the fighting ended today a whole host of other problems would be just begining.
The long term effects can be imagined. Vietnam vets being a perfect example, but they have been so disappeared that most of society pays no attention. The huge amounts of PTSD, agent orange poisoning and inability to adjust to normal society in general has been ongoing. To make it even more tragic, a lot of them were draftees (myself included) who were forced into the situation. There's also the first Gulf War vets with all the same issues and additional chemical/DUI sicknesses. This country is way too complacent about the effects of combat on a human being and consider these issues as personal weaknesses instead of inevitable consequence of making people kill other people. I agree that the ones who don't have PTSD are a real problem.
Excellent comments, aliensoup, and previous others.
I would also say that the powers that be have become far more savy when it comes to mind control in the training of military personnel. It seems that vets from the Vietnam era had more 'soul' than most of those i have encountered from the 21st century wars.
Nearly all of the articles on the occupation of Iraq fail to mention the 100,000 private contractors who are presently part of the occupation.
And the new plan for the protection of the U.S. Embassy will require 5,000 private mercenaries.
And of course all of this is funded by the American taxpayer while private corporations profit from the war crimes.
PLEASE: ALL OF YOU WHO UNDERSTAND THAT THE GREATEST THREAT TO THE FUNCTIONING OF OUR AMERICAN DEMOCRACY IS MONEY, GO TO: getmoneyout.com and sign the petition to amend the Constitution to prevent any politician from accepting money from any source to gain office or to remain in office...
or call 917 720 6888 to text your signature to this monumentally important move to amend the Constitution and prevent the large moneyed interests, Koch Brothers, et al, from continuing their unprecedented subversion of the democratic process in America.