How Much Sovereignty Iraqi Authorities Really Has? Iraq under Occupation

[kasm 0]

In the beginning, the U.S.-led Coalition forces said that their mission are liberation and not occupation.

 

In the summer of 2004, the U.S.-led Coalition Provision Authority handed over power to an interim Iraqi government .

 

In January 2005 was election to new Assembly to write the new Consitution and new governement was declared.

 

This week, a British force of more than 10 tanks backed by helicopters attacked the central jail of Basra[ 340 miles south of the capital], and broke down the walls and freed two British soldiers, allegedly undercover commandos dressed in Arab clothing, for allegedly shooting two Iraqi policemen, one of whom died.

 

What Liberation? What Democracy? and How much sovereignty Iraqi authorities really were granteed?

[brainless 0]

well ... the Iraqi authorities have all the sovereignity they dream of as long as they don't try to do anything against the occupation forces (for example, the iraqi vice president keeps asking for the occupation forces to leave Iraq every now and then ... they didn't even come up with a plan other than "might take a couple of years" yet...)

anyways, this incident leaves behind more clues as to what the US and UK forces do in Iraq since there has been a statement by the office of Muqtada al-Sadr which is kind of contradictory to the UK's version:

(not too good a translation but it sounds like Mr Cole got most of its contents)

Two soldiers from the British occupation forces opened fire on passers-by in the vicinity of a religious center where the people of Basra use to go, after which police patrols have a white car and arrested two persons riding it. It was found that they are British, and British occupation forces intervened to try to set them free. The people of Basra demonstrated to prevent this from occurring, and occupation forces reacted by opening fire on the demonstrators killing and wounding many of them. In retaliation the inhabitants burned two British tanks. The two Britons that were arrested had in their possession explosives and remote-control devices, as well as light and medium weapons and other accessories.
Late this night, British forces raided the police headquarters of the Basra province, set free the two Britons as well as close to 150 terrorists, and burned the police vehicles.

-> http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/

I admit that information released by iraqi resistance groups has to be treated with caution, too, but the US and UK officials did not bother to prove that iraqi resistance groups spread lies (contrary to many, many independent people who bothered to prove that US and UK officials are spreading lies by linking official statements about an incident, newspaper articles and resistance group informations on the same incident).

There are two points worth a close look in this statement:

a) The two persons who began the shooting were only identified as british soldiers after they have been arrested; it is a direct breach of the Geneva Convention when a nation's soldiers are not wearing uniforms but civil clothing and cars while they're at war (ok, officially this is not a war anymore but an occupation - the facts suggest that it's still war)

These two soldiers are accused of having been in the possession of explosives, triggers for those and weapons. Since they shot at iraqi police officers, the part with the weapons has to be true, I suppose I can safely assume that they were also in the possession of explosives. What do people in civilian clothing need explosives for when they're near a place were masses of religious people use to go? Probably they didn't intend to do something nice.
It's not that I want to talk badly about anyone but this incident leads to the conclusion that not all bomb attacks on military convois come from iraqi resistance fighters - at least some of them have been staged by US and UK forces. Yes, US forces as well - I doubt that the UK forces can do anything in Iraq without the US military knowing about that...

[wariorpk 0]

This whole Iraq ordeal is a mess. They need to do something quickly because this can only waste more money, lower the United State's reputation as a nation of peace, and make our citizens think that the war was a mistake (too late we have been there too long by a few years). They need to figure out something quick pull out or help Iraq's new government preform a miracle.

[Ryo 0]

There is a reason for the occupation of iraq to continue if we pull out now we will show all the other people like kim jong il in soouth korea that we are weak and powerless. Since we went to iraq many countries liekk syria and iran have given up their nuclear weapons programs inorder to creat peoce between our 2 countries(which will never happen) i think that the occuaption of iraq shows that america is a resilent country and we dont cower in the face of danger or stupidity on the part of the iraques. We are still in the process of training them and we can't pull out now if there is another terroist aruption there will be no trained iraque forces to handle it.