The defeat of the aggression of the United States in Iraq was expected even before the invasion began. There were many indicators to show that the right of Iraqis to independence and democracy would be stronger than all of the military might of the U.S.
As is well known in war theories, aggressive power can only achieve victory under two scenarios: by its ability to destroy completely, or by destroying the will of any resistance to continue. In the case of the war on Iraq, it is evident that the enemy of the United States is the majority of the Iraqi nation, which it attacked to destroy its Arab-Muslim identity, plunder its natural resources and subjugate it by creating a puppet government. For geopolitical, moral and practical reasons, this was not possible. The consequence of this impossibility is that the more the United States tries to destroy its enemies in Iraq, the more it finds that the resistance of the Iraqi people grows.
The Iraqi people through their culture, civilization and heritage support, and have always supported, the oppressed against the oppressor. If it seemed to some that the Iraqi people were against Saddam Hussein, they forgot that Iraqis were never against the Iraqi State itself, that the United States invaded to crush, abolish and remake according to its own interests and will. Only some Kurdish leaders who seek separation, and some political- religious Shiite men, who want to install Wilayat Al-Fakih (the rule of the supreme guardian) under Al-Hakim family, accept the destruction of the secular Iraqi State. Iraqis are proud of being Iraqis. They consider themselves all sons of Iraq and are proud of having a united Iraq that possesses oil, culture, science, water and a strategic position.
The ignorance of the American strategists and their allies - Ahmed Chalabi, Rend Rahim, Kinaan Makiyah, Falih Abdul-Jabar, and the like - who theorized that the U.S. invasion of Iraq in such a way that they took their own interests as reality, forgot the pride of Iraqis in their free will and their independence, and forgot their Arab-Muslim identity, which in them passes from father to son. They believed, or wanted to believe, that with some money and lots of terror, Iraqis would bow before their imperial project as they bowed - at least they thought - before Saddam Hussein. They forgot, or wanted to forget, that Saddam Hussein, in spite of his dictatorship, had the support of the secular, educated middle class for the nationalization of the oil industry, the development of Iraq's modern infrastructure, the universalisation of electricity, education and health services, and for putting Iraq in league with Cuba, Venezuela and North Korea in refusing imperialist diktat. They forgot also, Kurds and pro-Iranian religious leaders excepted, that Iraqis may differ, but they continue to feel that they are the same people, that they are brothers, and that they don't want Iran, Arab, Western or Eastern interference in their affairs.
In addition, the invasion of Iraq by the United States and its allies took place at a time when imperialist powers are no longer able to invade other countries as they did in the 19th century. The are a number of reasons for this.
First, the wars in Vietnam, Cuba, South Lebanon and Palestine proved that military superiority and military victory don't equate with the ability to occupy an invaded country if its people resist; and the Iraqi people proved they would resist from the very first battles in Um Qasr and Nassiryah.
Secondly, it's the youth of the world and progressive movements that build world public opinion, not the mainstream media that is controlled by the United States. This was proven in Seattle, Durban and in demonstrations around the world against the war on Iraq. We see the result of this reality in the anti-war demonstrations that have taken place in the U.S. itself.
Third, war and invasion cost money and the American people have no interest in paying to invade other countries, by way of which only the military industries and oil multinationals profit. This is especially the case since the former members of the Iraqi military, as any patriot would, prevented the occupation from using Iraqi oil to finance the occupation's military operations.
Fourth, civilization and international law will not permit more adventurers like those that President Bush and the neo-buccaneers around him have conducted, insulting the world's conscience by invading poor people in name of lies.
Fifth, Iraqi people, like all people, do not accept occupation and slavery.
Now we have arrived at a situation where the U.S., by invading Iraq, is in political and moral ruin from which it will not recover - if it tries - for years. At the same time, Iraq has been the victim of political, moral and economic crimes committed by the U.S. What's the way out?
I think all of this changing of tactics, like the Cairo Conference or the phony elections [in Iraq] are of no use. After all, the goal of all this is that Washington escapes liability in waging an illegal war against Iraq, and to decide its destiny. As long as Iraq is not left to its people, America's military, economic, political and moral losses will continue to mount. There is no path before the United States but to pull out rapidly and unconditionally, taking with it this monster which it has created and called "the Government and Security Forces." Washington must recognize that Iraq's oil is the property of all of the Iraqi people, and let the legal pre-invasion administration - especially the national army and resistance groups - take power and administer the country until free and fair democratic elections can take place.
The people of Iraq will never, however long a time is needed, recognize the puppet government, its contracts and agreements and laws, as legal or legitimate. In addition, if the U.S. wants to have amicable relations with the people of Iraq, it should pay compensation for all the damage and suffering it has caused.