Obama’s Plan for Iraq Is the Petraeus-Bush Iraq Plan

Obama’s Plan for Iraq Is the Petraeus-Bush Iraq Plan

Obama’s Plan for Iraq Is the Petraeus-Bush Iraq Plan

"The idea that Obama is making good on a campaign promise to end the war is playing with words,” says The Nation‘s Jeremy Scahill.

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

In a speech before the Disabled American Veterans national convention in Atlanta on Monday, President Obama said: "By the end of this month, we have brought more than 90,000 of our troops home from Iraq since I took office.… Because of the sacrifices of our troops and their Iraqi partners, violence continues to be the lowest it’s been in years.… Next month, we will change our military mission from combat to supporting and training Iraqi security forces." But as Democracy Now! host Amy Goodman points out, figures show that July was the deadliest month in Iraq in over a year with over 500 people killed.

As a guest on today’s Democracy Now!, The Nation‘s Jeremy Scahill says Obama is "implementing the policy that was on the desk of George W. Bush when he left the White House." Obama says that we are "changing from a military effort led by our troops to a civilian effort led by our diplomats," but as Scahill asserts, "that doesn’t just mean that there’s going to be negotiations by pencil pushers.” Last month, Hillary Clinton submitted a request to the Pentagon to “beef up” the State Department’s military contractor force. “When you take out all these combat troops, we want to have a replacement for that capacity," says Scahill. He goes on to say that Clinton, who as a candidate said she would ban Blackwater and other mercenary firms, is now responsible for increased reliance on these companies and private soldiers in Iraq. "You can say that officially combat has ended," he says. "But in reality you’re continuing it through the back door by bringing in these paramilitary forces and classifying them as diplomatic security, which was Bush’s game from the very beginning."

—Melanie Breault

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read, just one of the many incisive, deeply-reported articles we publish daily. Now more than ever, we need fearless journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media.

Throughout this critical election year and a time of media austerity and renewed campus activism and rising labor organizing, independent journalism that gets to the heart of the matter is more critical than ever before. Donate right now and help us hold the powerful accountable, shine a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug, and build a more just and equitable future.

For nearly 160 years, The Nation has stood for truth, justice, and moral clarity. As a reader-supported publication, we are not beholden to the whims of advertisers or a corporate owner. But it does take financial resources to report on stories that may take weeks or months to properly investigate, thoroughly edit and fact-check articles, and get our stories into the hands of readers.

Donate today and stand with us for a better future. Thank you for being a supporter of independent journalism.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy
x