Monday, September 08, 2008

Translation services - Iraq

Again, if anybody reading this has a hard time identifying the destructive and backward ideas of McCain I will rip him a new one, but until then I will continue to translate Obama's flowery and deceptive language.

From Obama's website (
"Military experts believe we can safely redeploy combat brigades from Iraq at a pace of 1 to 2 brigades a month that would remove them in 16 months. That would be the summer of 2010 – more than 7 years after the war began.

Under the Obama plan, a residual force will remain in Iraq and in the region to conduct targeted counter-terrorism missions against al Qaeda in Iraq and to protect American diplomatic and civilian personnel."

ACTUALLY... do I need to translate this? Is anybody reading this dumb enough to believe that a "residual force" is necessary beyond corporate interests? Also, with the ridiculous cost of the war, why can't it end sooner? Summer of 2010 is a long way off. With millions being spent by the hour, that is an especially long gravy train.

He doesn't mention the size of the "residual force" or what "diplomatic" and "civilian personnel" will be protected. Honestly shouldn't the American embassies require security provided by the government and any American civilians/business men make their own arrangements? As a civilian, can I expect "forces" to join me while I vacation or do business in other countries? I think tax-payers might disagree.

More from Obama:
"Bush Administration’s blank check approach has failed to press Iraq’s leaders to take responsibility for their future or to substantially spend their oil revenues on their own reconstruction."

translation: Yeah, I'm amazed Bush has not forced the Iraqis to hire Bechtel to rebuild the destruction we caused! Seems like a no-brainer!

"Obama will make sure we engage representatives from all levels of Iraqi society—in and out of government—to forge compromises on oil revenue sharing"

translation: We will continue to impose our will and reap financial benefits from "their" oil, which we will likely control indefinitely with our "residual force."


darren v said...

In a July 14 Op-ed in the NY Times Barack Obama wrote: "Unlike Senator John McCain, I opposed the war in Iraq before it began, and would end it as president."

I do not see how Obama's strategy will end the war. Adding to what my dear friend Prabhu stated I will analyze Obama's "plan for Iraq" which he layed out in the NY Times.

Ending the war will require a withdrawal of combat forces. But Obama is not proposing withdrawal , but a "phased redeployment of combat troops."

These troops will be sent "over the horizon" in the Middle East, but still within "striking distance" of Iraq. This means they will be sent to client states like Qatar, Kuwait, Turkey, and/or on aircraft carriers stationed in the Gulf.

As Prabhu said, his plan allows for a residual force.
"After this redeployment, a residual force in Iraq would perform limited missions: going after any remnants of al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia, protecting American service members and, so long as the Iraqis make political progress, training Iraqi security forces."

And as Prabhu said, the timeline he gives in not even definite. Obama "would consult with commanders on the ground and the Iraqi government to ensure that our troops were redeployed safely, and our interests protected. We would move them from secure areas first and volatile areas later."

Obama's strategy also demonstrates his support for the broader war on terror. Obama wrote that he "believed it was a grave mistake to allow ourselves to be distracted from the fight against al-Qaeda and the Taliban by invading a country that posed no imminent threat and had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks."

As my dear friend Prabhu has said, all war is wrong.
But Obama's strategy is not based on morality, but the interest of a tiny minority-- namely corporations, who's overwhelming influence over us have ripped imagination, selflessness, and service from our lives. Our goal must be to rid ourselves of these totalitarian institutions.

Money for jobs and education not for war and occupation

Hari Singh said...

I love your translation services, I just don't understand how people can be so scared about one nitwit candidate (McCain) that it forces them to overlook the obvious corruption of another (Obama). I especially don't understand it from people who consider themselves Sikh, who are supposed to live without fear.
I think you should do at least one post on McCain, since you're so good at putting it into common sense language.