Iraqi lawmakers say U.S. demanding 58 military bases

Now I can't prove this nor supply any concrete evidence, but I think the idiot's administration and I use fucking different dictionaries when defining sovereignty.

Iraqi lawmakers say the United States is demanding 58 bases as part of a proposed "status of forces" agreement that will allow U.S. troops to remain in the country indefinitely.

Leading members of the two ruling Shiite parties said in a series of interviews the Iraqi government rejected this proposal along with another U.S. demand that would effectively hand over the power to determine if a hostile act from another country is aggression against Iraq. Lawmakers said they fear this power would drag Iraq into a war between the United States and Iran.

"The points that were put forth by the Americans were more abominable than the occupation," said Jalal al Din al Saghir, a leading lawmaker from the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq . "We were occupied by order of the Security Council ," he said, referring to the 2004 Resolution mandating a U.S. military occupation in Iraq at the head of an international coalition. "But now we are being asked to sign for our own occupation. That is why we have absolutely refused all that we have seen so far."

Other conditions sought by the United States include control over Iraqi air space up to 30,000 feet and immunity from prosecution for U.S. troops and private military contractors. The agreement would run indefinitely but be subject to cancellation upon two years of notice from either side, lawmakers said.

How quickly would US lawmakers agree to such terms from, oh, lets say China? And would China even have the temerity to make such demands? Just asking.

But then, China is currently not occupying the US so those may be rhetorical questions.

Note: Headline links to source.