On 2012-10-09, at 2:54 PM, Doug Henwood wrote:
>
> On Oct 9, 2012, at 2:46 PM, 123hop at comcast.net wrote:
>
>> I'm so confused. I thought part of the point of the "liberation" was for them to be a captive buyer of US hardware.
>
> French, Chinese, and Russian companies got big gobs of their oil too. It's just not working out as planned.
At least the US was able to install a puppet government in Iraq and establish forward military bases in the country which has allowed them to isolate Iran and extend their influence in the Middle East. Oh, right, that didn't quite work out as planned either:
"Mr. Maliki’s tolerance of Iran’s use of Iraqi airspace suggests the limits of the Obama administration’s influence in Iraq, despite the American role in toppling Saddam Hussein and ushering in a new government. The American influence also appears limited despite its assertion that it is building a strategic partnership with the Iraqis.
"Mr. Maliki has sought to maintain relations with Iran, while the United States has led the international effort to impose sanctions on the Tehran government. At the same time, the Iraqi prime minister appears to look at the potential fall of Mr. Assad as a development that might strengthen his Sunni Arab and Kurdish rivals in the region. Some states that are the most eager to see Mr. Assad go, like Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, have poor relations with Mr. Maliki and his Shiite-dominated government…"