For anyone who wants the US to leave Iraq a.s.a.p, our fearless leader has a much different plan in mind.  According to recent reports from The Independent of London and even from Iraqi lawmakers, the Bush administration has been pressuring the Iraqi government to sign an agreement which would allow the US to keep over 50 military bases (double what we have control of now), give American soldiers and contractors complete legal immunity while at the same time allowing American forces to carry out arrests of Iraqi citizens and conduct military campaigns without prior authorization or even consultation with the Iraqi government, and would give the US control of Iraqi airspace of up to 30,000 feet. 

The Bush administration has tried to push through the agreement by holding hostage $50 billion of Iraq's money.  The US is threatening to remove tens of billions of dollars of that money to settle outstanding court debts dating back to the 1980's unless Iraq signs the controversial and outrageous agreement.  Today, Iraqi lawmakers told the media they rejected the agreement, with one lawmaker stating, "Now we are being asked to sign for our own occupation.  That is why we have absolutely refused to sign all that we have seen so far."

I guess this is also what John McCain had in mind when he said he would be alright with the US being in Iraq for another 100 years.  It certainly is a step in the right direction.  And it also helps the war hawks in their campaign to flex their military muscles at Iran, because Iraqi lawmakers also say the US has demanded the right to determine if another country is committing aggression against Iraq, which the Bush administration has repeatedly done in regards to Iraq and Iraq since the war began. 

It is kind of commical that we accuse Iran of using aggression against Iraq by supposedly arming insurgents and aiding them in their attempt to kill American soldiers, yet don't view our invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq as aggressive.  And it's not as if we haven't engaged in the same type of campaigns ourselves throughout history:  Cuba, Chile, Nicaragua, Venezelua, Iraq, Afghanistan, oh and I almost forgot, Iran.  Throughout the Cold War, the United States on several occasions trained, funded, and armed "insurgents" in other countries to help overthrow governments who weren't quite to our liking.  In some cases the new American-friendly governments we installed were far worse than those we helped remove. 

This is hypocrisy at its finest.  And not only that, this is another aggressive move by our aggressive government to put the United States in an even worse position than it already is.  We don't need to spend more time in Iraq than is absolutely necessary.  We can't afford it, the majority of Americans don't want it--and certainly a large majority of Iraqi's don't want it, either--and the longer we stay, the more reason we give terrorists to continue to hate us, to increase their hatred of us and to recruit new terrorists to hate us.  Why doesn't our government get this? 

To me, this is more about Iran than Iraq.  The Bush administration wants to have a sweet set up for when they can finally get their war with Iran (even if it takes years to do), edging ever closer to sealing our domination of the Middle East and their rich oil reserves.  I know Iran's government isn't friendly, and their desire to blow Israel off the map isn't something to be taken lightly.  I don't, however buy into their supposedly advanced nuclear weapons program, and I don't think that at this point in time they are even a tiny threat to our security.  By staying in Iraq any longer than we should, we are more of a threat to our security than any other country on the planet.