Newbies: Invading Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism, here's proof

[maggrwaggr]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/vv/20040220/lo_laweekly/51202&cid=891&ncid=1501

From the horse's mouth, from a lifelong republican and conservative who was there in the trenches:

(snip)

Q: So you dont think there was a genuine interest as to whether or not there really were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?

A: Its not about interest. We knew. We knew from many years of both high-level surveillance and other types of shared intelligence, not to mention the information from the U.N., we knew, we knew what was left and the viability of any of that. Bush said he didnt know.

The truth is, we know didnt have these things. Almost a billion dollars has been spent a billion dollars! by David Kays group to search for these WMD, a total whitewash effort. They didnt find anything, they didnt expect to find anything.

Q: So if, as you argue, they knew there werent any of these WMD, then what exactly drove the neoconservatives to war?

A: The neoconservatives pride themselves on having a global vision, a long-term strategic perspective. And there were three reasons why they felt the U.S. needed to topple Saddam, put in a friendly government and occupy Iraq.

One of those reasons is that sanctions and containment were working and everybody pretty much knew it. Many companies around the world were preparing to do business with Iraq in anticipation of a lifting of sanctions. But the U.S. and the U.K. had been bombing northern and southern Iraq since 1991. So it was very unlikely that we would be in any kind of position to gain significant contracts in any post-sanctions Iraq. And those sanctions were going to be lifted soon, Saddam would still be in place, and we would get no financial benefit.

The second reason has to do with our military-basing posture in the region. We had been very dissatisfied with our relations with Saudi Arabia, particularly the restrictions on our basing. And also there was dissatisfaction from the people of Saudi Arabia. So we were looking for alternate strategic locations beyond Kuwait, beyond Qatar, to secure something we had been searching for since the days of Carter to secure the energy lines of communication in the region. Bases in Iraq, then, were very important that is, if you hold that is Americas role in the world. Saddam Hussein was not about to invite us in.

The last reason is the conversion, the switch Saddam Hussein made in the Food for Oil program, from the dollar to the euro. He did this, by the way, long before 9/11, in November 2000 selling his oil for euros. The oil sales permitted in that program arent very much. But when the sanctions would be lifted, the sales from the country with the second largest oil reserves on the planet would have been moving to the euro.

The U.S. dollar is in a sensitive period because we are a debtor nation now. Our currency is still popular, but its not backed up like it used to be. If oil, a very solid commodity, is traded on the euro, that could cause massive, almost glacial, shifts in confidence in trading on the dollar. So one of the first executive orders that Bush signed in May <2003> switched trading on Iraqs oil back to the dollar.

(more at the link)

[pinto]

1. big kick for Ms Kiatkowski.

[scottxyz]

2. This article is going to have major impact

I think it's not only going to affect Bush - it's going to affect world financial markets - the dollar specifically.

This is a major crack in the regime.

Bush is totally backed into a corner now. You can't have a 20-year veteran policy analyst from the Air Force come out and saying you've been cooking intelligence like this.

This is a major crack in the Bush regime, and it going to keep on crumbling now. They're backed into a corner because this is on yahoo, this Lietenant Colonel is going to be on the new radio station at the end of the month, everyone's wondering why he's so afraid to talk to the 9/11 commission, his campaign ads are a disaster, Spain dropped out of the coalition of the willing - they haven't had any good news in months.

First it was exposed that the whole WMD thing was a lie.

Now we're getting into the details (and the billions) of how that lie was manufactured.

And it's being done in major papers, websites, soon on radio.

And Tuesday the book "House of Bush, House of Saud" comes out. Another major kick in the teeth for the Bushies - showing how Bush got 1.7 billion dollars from the Saudis over the years and how they've been treating him like some kind of hired lackey. When they ordered their lackey to airlift the Bin Laden family out of the US, he obeyed. How's he gonna look like a strong war president when he was taking orders from the enemy???

[wyldwolf]

3. Also this video clip

http://www.liberalresurgent.com/silence.mpg

[RedEarth]

4. Thanks for the post......

I had read an article that Kwiatkowski had written several months ago and I'm pleased to see her story is starting to get some more coverage. A very brave woman......

below is some more of the article...



You gave your life to the military, you voted Republican for many years, you say you served in the Pentagon right up to the outbreak of war. What does it feel like to be out now, publicly denouncing your old bosses?

Know what it feels like? It feels like duty. Thats what it feels like. Ive thought about it many times. You know, I spent 20 years working for something that at least under this administration turned out to be something I wasn't working for. I mean, these people have total disrespect for the Constitution. We swear an oath, military officers and NCOs alike swear an oath to uphold the Constitution. These people have no respect for the Constitution. The Congress was misled, it was lied to. At a very minimum that is a subversion of the Constitution. A pre-emptive war based on what we knew was not a pressing need is not what this country stands for.

What I feel now is that I'm not retired. I still have a responsibility to do my part as a citizen to try and correct the problem.

[leesa]

5. And neither did invading Afghanistan. We bombed them as we promised

in July of 2001 because they would not cooperate with the proposed pipeline that Cheney and Ken Lay were desperate to get. The Taliban would not agree to terms and our government representatives said they could have "a carpet of gold or a carpet of bombs" The Taliban refused and the rest is history.

It had not one thing to do with 9-11 or with terrorism, unless you count US terrorism against Afghanistan.

[maggrwaggr]

6. kicking

:kick:

more newbies all the time