Iraq is a disaster. We are now approaching http://icasualties.org/oif/” target=”_blank”>4,000 U.S. soldiers dead and updates of the Lancet study estimate that over a million Iraqis have died! This astounding figure was recently corrorborated in a http://www.opinion.co.uk/Newsroom_detail s.aspx?NewsId=78″ target=”_blank”>British study this month. Security only declines day by day and dependable power, clean water and employment is unavailable. The U.S. spends about http://www.democrats.org/a/2005/10/the_real_cost_o.php”>$200 million each day 70% of Americans want it to end.

Whether it's the Baker-Hamilton report, or the GAO, it seems like everyone except the White House considers it a disaster. The consensus seems to be calling for a new approach, that will emphasize a political solution rather than a military one. However, the consensus is less clear as to what that solution may be. What is clear is that it is a colossal error, plagued by instability and massive violence, sending more and more human beings to their deaths every day. But, again, the nature of the violence and instability in Iraq is seen in different ways.

   The White House, as well as most of the Republican candidates, see it largely as the work of global terrorists and Iraqi extremists attempting to drive out U.S. forces and the establish a National State of terror from which they can launch their aggresive war against the United States. “Al Qaeda” is thrown out a lot, even though the organization has a very small presence in the country, estimated at around 1,500 people total. They therefore, justify our continued presence there as crucial to national defense and winning the War on Terror.

   Others, including many Democrats, consider the violence to be  essentially a sectarian conflict or full blown civil war. Their soulution is drawing down combat forces, while continuing to leave somewhere between 60,000-90,000 troops in the region, apparently, to “fight terrorism”, prevent the possibility of the conflict escalating and spilling over into other countries, mass genocide, to train Iraqi forces, etc. 

   So, even though there's a lot of arguing between the two groups both sides are committed to leaving a substantial U.S. troop presence in the country. That is, though they disagree on the amount of troops to keep there, they both agree that a military presence is key to securing the country. The people that favor the second view, including Clinton, Obama and Edwards, and talk so much about “ending the war”, are planning to leave a big military presence there. That's what they call ending the war. But, what has to be realized is that this no longer a war. Outrageous amounts of men, women and children are dying every day, but this is not a war. This is an occupation.

   That's the word that neither side likes to use, but it's the only word to describe it. The Republicans want to play offense in the occupation and the Democrats want to play defense in the occupation, but at the end of the day it's still an occupation. It is an occupation based upon oil and privatization, an occupation based upon big business and reconstruction contracts. It is an occupation that is the cause of the violence and instability in Iraq and it is an occupation that we have to start looking at if we are going to stabalize Iraq and bring peace and security there, as well as in America. 

   In April, an http://abcnews.go.com/images/US/1033aIraqpoll.pdf”>ABC poll found that 97% of Sunnis and 83% of Shia opposed the presence of U.S. military. The same poll indicated that the entire infrastructure is growing steadily worse, as the availability of power, clean water and jobs are declining. Earlier this month a http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6983841.stm”>BBC poll  found that 60% of Iraqis approved of attacks on U.S. forces. The same poll found 70% of Iraqis saying that security has been steadily deteriorating, even with the surge in troops. As poll after poll shows these trends to be accurate, it starts to become obvious that keeping a U.S. military presence is entirely the wrong answer. Yet, these other candidates are all talking about continuing the occupation?

   If we look at what's going on in Iraq, we see massive corruption. We have these private companies, like Blackwater, carrying out security operations, huge corporations such as Halliburton, landing no bid and cost-plus contracts for reconstruction, all of these companies making Billions rebuilding Iraq as the Iraqis get little to nothing in money and only a declining standard of living from the “reconstruction”. And then there's the Oil.

   Iraq, having the third largest oil reserves in the world, is being pressured into passing a law that would in effect privatize over 80% of their Oil reserves to multinational companies, particularly U.S. oil companies. This “hydrocarbon law” not only gives the rights to U.S. and other foreign oil companies to do business in Iraq it enables them to have power in making the decisions over the contracts themselves. That is, a Federal Council is established to make decisions upon oil contract negotiations. However, representatives of these private oil companies will be on the board and thus approving their own contracts and terms. These are conditions of our occupation. These are the conditions of injustice, corruption and theft. These are the conditions that are enraging Iraqis and fueling the insurgency. These are the conditions of instability and violence that have, predictably enough, have lead to increased instability and violence.

   What we need to do is create conditions to allow for security or security will never arise. We need to create the conditions of fairness, stability and reparations. We need to allow the Iraqi people to possess their own wealth in Oil, to create jobs and a more stable economy through national reconstruction efforts. We need to end this occupation and start thinking more practically by realizing that it is the occupation that is creating the violence and convene an international peace keeping force to help the country remian stable as it rebuilds. We need to create the conditions of peace in order to strengthen Iraq as well as our own security and standing in the world. We need to start working with others and take a more even handed approach, building relationships instead of enemies.

   We need to elect the only candidate who understands these things and is willing to take action; the only candidate who has consistently spoken out against the war; the only candidate who has spoken out against the mass corruption and this most unjust oil law; the only candidate to tell the people the truth that we can”>http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3177″>can end this war anytime we want end this war anytime we want; and the only candidate pursuing peace, peace that is practical and makes America stronger.

  Dennis Kucinich plan to end the occupation-H.R. 1234:

 

(1) the United States should end the occupation of Iraq immediately, simultaneously with the introduction of a United Nations-led international peacekeeping force pursuant to an agreement with nations within the region and which incorporates the terms and conditions specified in section 1;

(2) the Department of Defense should use readily available existing funds to bring all United States troops and necessary equipment home while a political settlement is being negotiated and preparations are made for a transition to an international security and peacekeeping force;

(3) the Department of Defense should order a simultaneous return of all United States contractors and subcontractors and turn over all contracting work to the Iraqi Government;

(4) the United Nations should be encouraged to prepare an international security and peacekeeping force to be deployed to Iraq, replacing United States troops who then return home;

(5) the United States should provide funding for a United Nations peacekeeping mission, in which 50 percent of the peacekeeping troops should come from nations with large Muslim populations;

(6) the international security force, under United Nations direction, should remain in place until the Iraqi Government is capable of handling its own security;

(7) the Iraqi Government, with assistance from the United Nations, should immediately restart the failed reconstruction program in Iraq and rebuild roads, bridges, schools, hospitals, and other public facilities, houses, and factories with jobs and job training going to local Iraqis;

(8) the Iraqi Government, in an act of political sovereignty, should set aside initiatives to privatize Iraqi oil interests or other national assets and abandon all efforts, whether at the behest of the United States or otherwise, to change Iraqi national law to facilitate privatization;

(9) the Iraq Government, in an act of political sovereignty, should set forth a plan to stabilize Iraq's cost for food and energy, on par to what the prices were before the United States invasion and occupation;

(10) the Iraqi Government, in an act of political sovereignty, should strive for economic sovereignty for Iraq by working with the world community to restore Iraq's fiscal integrity without structural readjustment measures of the International Monetary Funds or the World Bank;

(11) the United States should initiate a reparations program for the loss of Iraqi lives, physical and emotional injuries, and damage to property, which should include an effort to rescue the tens of thousands of Iraqi orphans from lives of destitution; and

(12) the United States should refrain from any covert operations in Iraq and any attempts to destabilize the Iraqi Government.