Not to put too fine a point on it, but Iraq will be a client state of the US. This was always the PNAC plan. That’s why we built the giant embassy. We are never leaving, and we were never supposed to leave. Note how they couch all this as a new development, emerging from the fog of war…progress.
President Bush on Monday signed a deal setting the foundation for a potential long-term U.S. troop presence in Iraq, with details to be negotiated over matters that have defined the war debate at home — how many U.S. forces will stay in the country, and for how long.
The agreement between Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki confirms that the United States and Iraq will hash out an “enduring” relationship in military, economic and political terms. Details of that relationship will be negotiated in 2008, with a completion goal of July, when the U.S. intends to finish withdrawing the five combat brigades sent in 2007 as part of the troop buildup that has helped curb sectarian violence.
[snip]
The proposal underlines how the United States and Iraq are exploring what their relationship might look like once the U.S. significantly draws down its troop presence. It comes as a Democratic Congress — unsuccessfully, so far — prods Bush to withdraw troops faster than he wants.
It’s miraculous how this will all get ironed out just before the US elections. And all this time Bush has been complaining about timetables, but now they don’t seem so bad.
Two senior Iraqi officials familiar with the issue say Iraq’s government will embrace a long-term U.S. troop presence in return for U.S. security guarantees as part of a strategic partnership. The two officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the subject is sensitive, said U.S. military and diplomatic representatives appeared generally favorable, subject to negotiations on the details, which include preferential treatment for American investments.
Preferential treatment for U.S. investors could provide a huge windfall if Iraq can achieve enough stability to exploit its vast oil resources. Such a deal would also enable the United States to maintain leverage against Iranian expansion at a time of growing fears about Tehran’s nuclear aspirations.
[snip]
“The basic message here should be clear: Iraq is increasingly able to stand on its own; that’s very good news, but it won’t have to stand alone,” said Lute, who rarely holds televised briefings.
He said it is too soon to tell what the “shape and size” of the U.S. military commitment will look like, including military bases.
The Iraqi officials said that under the proposed formula, Iraq would get full responsibility for internal security and U.S. troops would relocate to bases outside the cities. Iraqi officials foresee a long-term presence of about 50,000 U.S. troops, down from the current figure of more than 160,000.
I’m sure the Iraqi people won’t mind living in a puppet state so that the US can control their natural resources, meddle in the region from the comfort of their giant military base and embassy, and enable greedy investors to siphon off whatever remaining Iraqi wealth may still exist.

#1 by malcontent on November 27, 2007 - 7:36 am
Right now the comfort of a military base in Iraq could be any of 15 separate facilities at various stages of development.
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/occupation/2004/0323bases.htm
When you consider the meaning of the latest slogan in DC, “the surge is working”, from an Iraqi perspective combined with our inherent American sensibilities, you might get sick reading the latest from Larry Johnson. Do dive into the comments for the full flavor please.
http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2007/11/26/four-days-in-iraq-and-this-means-the-surge-is-working/
But King George has a guy working to secure Iraq’s status as a protectorate, Gen. Lute, along with the current leader of Iraq’s federal government, Maliki.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071126/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_us
We’ll see how long Maliki lasts now that his coalition is falling apart. Juan Cole consistently offers the most insightful and accurate portrayals of these matters and the outlook is dim.
http://www.juancole.com/2007/11/dulaim-al-maliki-is-trying-to.html
I truly wonder at the amazing ability of our federal leadership (Congress and White House)to suppress their humanity while effectively bombasting morality and leadership to so many Americans. How do these people sleep or find joy with so much blood on their hands?
How much greed, misdirection and denial does it take to keep this juggernaut rolling?