UK: "No long-term imperialist ambitions" in Iraq...

The UK's defense minister, John Reid, made a bit of a Freudian slip (perhaps two) when confirming Britain's plans to reduce its Iraqi presence...

From The Australian:

" BRITAIN was likely to begin scaling back its forces in Iraq within the next 12 months, Defence Secretary John Reid said today.

"I believe it is a process that could start - no more than that - over the next 12 months," he told the US news channel CNN.

Mr Reid insisted Britain did not have "long-term imperialist ambitions" in Iraq and said US-led forces, which include around 8500 British troops, would only stay as long as needed."

SO, oddly enough, the Brits don't have a problem with using the word "imperialist," especially when they are in no demographic or economic position to act so (of course, the Americans aren't, either; but, of course, we have Dubya, not Blair, in charge).

Still, there's no real question that "as long as needed" equals "within the next 12 months."

Just in time for the 2006 elections. Some "secret plan" to end the war in Iraq, this, 1700+ military lives later. Plus thousands of military wounded/injured and tens/hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilian dead/wounded/injured.

Everything, everything, about this war, about this administration, is about politics for Dubya and the Republicans.

"Worry"