U.S. Didn't Want to Be Called Occupiers

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/news-article.aspx?storyid=11509

WASHINGTON (AP) -- American military commanders did not impose curfews, halt looting or order Iraqis back to work after Saddam Hussein's regime fell because U.S. policymakers were reluctant to declare U.S. troops an occupying force, says an internal Army review examined by The Associated Press.

As a result, the Bush administration's first steps at reconstruction in Iraq were severely hampered, creating a power vacuum that others quickly moved to fill, and a growing mistrust on the part of ordinary Iraqis, the report said.

Since those first days, the U.S. effort in Iraq has been hampered by a growing insurgency with persistent and deadly attacks against U.S. forces.

The review, a postwar self-evaluation by the 3rd Infantry Division (Mechanized), said the political decision to call the U.S. forces that arrived in Baghdad "liberators" instead of "occupying forces" left the division's officers uncertain about their legal authority in postwar Baghdad and other cities. Under international law, the report says, the troops were indeed an occupation force and had both rights and responsibilities.
<snip>

Okay... How about calling them "guests that are overstaying their welcome?"

[J B]

1. The US asked for occupying power status at the UN.

How did they not want to be called occupiers again?

[ConcernedCanuk]

2. You missed the "semantics" ? ?

. . The USA wants occupying "status"

. . But they don't want to be "called" Occupiers.

Ya Know,

Nuthing pisses off the neighbourhood Bully more than CALLING him a Bully !

[burrowowl]

7. Did the U$

really ask for occupier tatus. Under the Geneva Convention, Occupiers have certain responsibilities, which we have not been fulfilling.

[Don_G]

3. Why Would That Prevent

The lack of a plan on Dimbo's part to "manage" the country in all respects save the oil reserves there?

[UpInArms]

4. because it conflicted with their flawed logic (sic)

n/t

[Don_G]

6. Logic From ShrubCo??

They're just doing the propaganda thing while they misdirect our attention from a thourough and systemic rape of our nation.

[Junkdrawer]

5. Okaaay... "Unwelcome Dwellers", "Illegal Residents", "Military Visitors"..

There, is that any better???

[peterh]

8. I’m glad this is reappearing, but it’s really old news…

To my recollection, without going back and researching, the term occupier was forced upon the twit by the UN. It was quickly recognized that we were staying and I think even the existing coalition partners at the time were in agreement with the UN on this one. The twit had no maneuvering room and had to accept the responsibilities that go with being an occupier. Once the WH acknowledged, the media followed suit. Thus, the early tune of liberator grudgingly gave way to occupier….funny how that works.

It still boggles my mind on how this hasn’t really resonated with the public. There’s just not one good connotation that can be associated with the term occupier, yet we are with half the people comfortable with it. Another sign of the dummying down of America and the corresponding shift in the cultural war.

[rustydog]

9. Bush calls himself a compassionate conservative

and he ain't any such animal.
He calls the troops liberators when they aren't.
Bush does not like to be called what he is and does.
He is a liar and his armies are occupiers of a foreign land.

If it walks like a duck, if it quacks like a duck, if it looks like a duck...You got yourself a duck.