Is the US occupying Iraq by Force?

The Iraqi parliament has voted to end American military presence in Iraq. Subsequently, the prime minister Adel Abdul Mahdi has asked US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo ” to send a delegation to Iraq to put a mechanism in place for implementing the Iraqi parliament decision to safely withdraw troops from Iraq”.

The circumstances in which the US invaded Iraq have always been controversial but the main excuse for the invasion was to disarm Iraq and prevent it from manufacturing weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The background was the US resolve to fight a war against terrorism in the wake of the 9/11 attack. Immediately after the invasion, it was clear to anyone that there were no WMDs in Iraq. To most of us it seemed more likely that the US attacked Iraq in 2003 because they didn’t like a person called Saddam Hussein.

But it wasn’t just the US. Like the big bully in school who rarely acts alone, there was a coalition of followers including UK as would be expected and also Australia; but somewhat surprisingly Denmark and Poland too.

The coalition against terrorism was relevant because they fought and substantially diminished the ISIS.

Then the leader of the coalition started behaving very erratically. The US under the Trump administration allowed Turkey to invade north eastern Syria in October 2019 and badly bash up the Kurds.

Now, in the new year they decided to hog the spotlight from Nancy Pelosi. Citing an imminent threat to unspecified US interests from an Iranian general who looked like a movie star, they sent the drones to kill him. Then they called him a very bad man.

The only person, outside Iran, who appeared to feel the tragedy of the attack is an american actress, Rose Mcgowan.

So I find several baffling tendencies here that repeat themselves, time after time. Here they are:

Every time the US goes to battle for a specific purpose, the job is invariably expanded and the president of the time starts seeing “bad men” everywhere. Why is that? and why is it especially likely if the president has problems at home?

Why is it sometimes difficult for the opposition to dissent in war time, whether it be in the US, in Turkey and in India? When does it become easier to oppose the policies of the rulers, like it was in Russia, immediately after the first great war?

How thick must your skin be to continue in your job even though you keep blundering into the control panel and triggering crises every day?

Why do bullies always have followers? How can these followers have no principle, except to follow?

Do people who express their feelings on impulse always regret it?

Is the US illegally occupying another sovereign country?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s