U. S. Permanent Bases in Iraq

Many believe the U. S. invaded Iraq with the intention of staying there permanently. It is a strategic location in the Middle East. To prove the point that the U. S. never intended to leave, advocates point to the number of permanent bases the U. S. is building in Iraq.

In regards to the permanent bases the U. S. is building in Iraq, I was searching for the "permanent" bases the U. S. built in Vietnam and I came across this article, written in June 2006. Imagine, trade and diplomatic ties with a nation which we feared so much we had to kill a million plus of them and 58,000 American men and 8 American women, to keep them from invading us! All those lives lost, for what? If the U. S. returns to Vietnam, maybe they will do it right this time. A war by the way, that was started by the democrats. It does not matter which party is in power, most men, given an army the size of the U.S. Army, wants to use it. If you have the best in the world you want to play the Superbowl. There's no greater Superbowl than war.

All should heed the advice of President Eisenhower in his address to the nation- http://www.gutenberg.org/catalog/world/readfile?pageno=5&fk_files=187741 -about the conflict in the Formosa Straits on the ironic date, Sept 11, (1958), "This means that, in our view, negotiations and conciliation should never be abandoned in favor of force and strife."Thank goodness President Eisenhower did not go to war with China over their actions in the Formosa Straits. He had seen war and no longer needed to play toy soldiers. Am I suggesting we negotiate with terrorists? No. I'm suggesting we would be better off had we continued negotiating with Saddam Hussein, who is a secularist, and would have kept Iran at bay. Look at us now, negotiating with the Vietnamese Communist. Who would have thought it! At the end of the article there is a quote by Lord Palmerston that nations have no permanent enemies or friends, only permanent interest. I think this is also true of people. Free trade, when goods and services cross borders, armies do not.

Bilbo Baggins
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr. Jack Wheeler*BrookesNews.Com
Monday 12 June 2006

One of the first things George W. Bush did as his presidency was getting off the ground in 2001 was to sign a bilateral trade agreement with Vietnam. Since then, trade between the US and Vietnam has grown 400 percent to $7.8 billion last year. Last week, the US and Vietnam signed an agreement that paves the way for Vietnam to join the WTO, the World Trade Organization.On Monday, June 5, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was in Hanoi meeting Vietnam's Defense Minister Pham Van Tra and Prime Minister Phan Van Khai. Noting that a US Navy ship will soon be visiting a Vietnamese port for the fourth time in four years, a reporter asked Rummy if the US was seeking basing rights in Vietnam."We have no plans for access to military facilities in Vietnam," was Rummy's reply. When diplomacy requires it, Rumsfeld can lie with the best of them. For the very purpose of his Hanoi sojourn was to discuss just such access. His meetings, and all the cooperation that proceeded it have been in preparation for one announcement.This November, President Bush will go on a state visit to Vietnam. On November 18, he will address the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit hosted by Vietnam in Hanoi. During this visit, it will be announced that the United States Navy will once again have an operating base at Cam Ranh Bay.Cam Ranh Bay was the major port facility of the US Armed Forces during the Vietnam War.