"Sovereignty" has been handed over to Iraq two days early.
It seems a good time to repost my concerns from May 1st because the questions haven't been answered, or even asked. Six permanent American bases are being constructed as we pretend to be beginning the process of disengagement.
While Senator Kerry's call for a UN presence in Iraq may appear reasonable
to some, it continues to ignore the elephant in the room. And that is the
long-term strategy of repositioning American military assets that are no
longer welcome in Saudi Arabia or needed in Western Europe, on the Arabian
Peninsula.
It would seem that the thinking behind the Senator's proposal is that, if
the Americans aren't welcome in their own name, perhaps they'll be accepted
under the aegis of NATO or the UN. But that ignores the fact that the
American people haven't decided that they want their military assets
distributed around the globe; that they want bases closed at home so they
can be reconstructed in Iraq.
I know I don't. If American principles and business practices are not
welcome in their own right, I don't want them supported by our military
might.
Given the gravity of this situation, it almost seems that the issues of
universal medical care, education and support for our elderly population
are, like religion, homophobia and the war on terror, merely a distraction
from what ought to be front and center in the campaign for the presidential
election.
Senator Kerry needs to be asked "What are your plans for the long-term
positioning of our military assets. Will we bring them home or keep them
dispersed around the globe to generate antagonism and resentment?"