Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why was the * Admin so hot to take action against Iraq?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
TheDebbieDee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 12:46 PM
Original message
Why was the * Admin so hot to take action against Iraq?
Edited on Sun Aug-14-05 12:47 PM by TheDebbieDee
With the firing of a 4-star General and the slapping down of another 4-star General, maybe there are some parallels in history to explain the real reason that the * admin is so hot to spread our military forces even thinner with talk of an Iranian invasion:

Hitler invaded Russia and set-up camps for a substantial number of his troops in North Africa.

Maybe it was, in part, because he was afraid to keep them in Europe when he knew that some of his Generals would eventually begin plotting to overthrow his regime.

If a large amount of his troops were successful invading Russia, so much the better: they were busy and out of the way until he needed them for some other mission.

Hitler could, oh, maybe even get away with stealing elections with his military off-balance from deployments and re-deployments.

If his invasion of Russia was not successful, then those troops and their commanders were one less enemy from which the paranoid Hitler had to defend himself.

Can you see any other parallels with current events?

I read somewhere that Bush majored in history. I x-posted this on the history forum.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
K8-EEE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 12:48 PM
Response to Original message
1. They Need Justification For A Draft
They need something like 9/11 to "change everything," ie, go back on their word that there would be no draft.

They simply can't continue these unending wars with a volunteer army, as the chicken hawk freepers like to be armchair warriors rather than put their asses on the line.

Naturally there will be country club type loopholes for the Bush Twins and their friends...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wli Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. yep, here comes the nuclear MIHOP n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stray cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 01:19 PM
Response to Original message
2. Bush thought it would be easy and provide a new base
I think Bush really thought it would be a cakewalk and we would be welcomed with open arms. Iraq as an American allie would provide a friendly base to attack Iran and Syria.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 02:04 PM
Response to Original message
3. Because it was available and easy
a palooka for Bush to knock down and be the "wartime president" of an easy, popular war.

Because it was available and easy, there were a number of different goals that coalesced.

Some in the admin wanted get us in favor of war as are natural state and a single leader as the status quo for our "democracy.

Some wanted the oil.

Some wanted bases and knew we had to leave Saudi.

Some wanted to have some country we could beat the shit out of in an inhuman way as a sign that we are the baddest mfers on the planet.

Some wanted to cure Poppy's failure to finish an evil dictator.

But agreement on Iraq was premised on it being easy and available.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stirk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 06:48 PM
Response to Original message
5. They're incredibly out of touch. I think they may actually believe it
Edited on Sun Aug-14-05 06:48 PM by Stirk
will help the Republicans in the 2006 elections.

Still, I've no doubt that the real motivation is to control Iran's resources by setting up a US-friendly regime. Same old same old.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 06:58 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Main reasons
Bush Regime Iraq Successes

1. Saddam will no longer sell Iraqi oil via the Euro.

2, A military foothold in the ME other than Saudi Arabia.

3, No countries will be able to buy Iraqi oil that the U.S. disapproves of.

4. The Multi-Intl. Oil Corps are reaping great profits, esp. Bush Junta fave ally Saudi Dicktatorshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 07:03 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. 5. KBR was headed for bankruptcy. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mayberry Machiavelli Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 07:17 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. Don't forget Domestic Politics. Shrub presidency was NOWHERE
before the drumbeat for war in Iraq.

Crap economy.
Corporate scandal, a new one every week.
He was fast on the road to one term palookaville before the great idea to make him a "war president".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vogonjiltz Donating Member (298 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 07:00 PM
Response to Original message
7. I don't at all.
Hitler invaded Russia because he felt the the Reich was pre-ordained to take Russia as liebensraum for the German volk. The local slavs would thier slaves. He also had designs on oil fields in the caucasus. He picked the summer solstice as a fotuitous day to invade.
His grand scheme in North Africa was to swing through the Middle East and have the two armies meet up.
The schemes of the German officers came about when they figured out that Hitler was delusional and would bring about the destruction of Germany.
As time went on he became more delusional and paranoid of course, but that came after the start of Operation Barbarossa.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lindacooks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 07:13 PM
Response to Original message
9. It was a personal grudge chimpy had against Hussein,
for 'trying to kill mah daddy!!'

No kidding.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 07:22 PM
Response to Original message
11. If you haven't read this,
http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm

This is where it started. Look at the signatures. Most of those guys are now part of the Bush Administration. We have been taken over by a fascist think tank. Bush is just their tool.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
delen Donating Member (134 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Yes , but
This started thirty years or more ago when OPEC countries Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iran, Iraq and others nationalized their oil production which until then had been handled by large and mostly American oil companies, much in the same manor that Halliburton is handling Iraq's today. That is these companies controlled the drilling shipping, refinement and kicked back a percentage of the profits to the necessary people in what ever country was concerned. During the years 1970-1973 these countries took control of their oil production and with it all the profits.
Then in 1973 in retaliation for America's support of Israel in the Yom Kippur war they embargoed oil. The effect on the American economy was devastating, but more over America's world standing as top dog was forever diminished. This is really agood part of the reason we pulled out of Viet Nam quite literally we ran out of gas.
So what to do, how to put America back on top? Many things had to be in place first including the fall of the Soviet Union.
This is the purpose of r the * presidency, to go to war with Iraq, why specific ly Iraq ? We had been softening up Iraq since the Gulf War.
Phase one is almost complete, time to begin phase 2
May heaven help us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 12:30 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. Your right.
The Clinton letter though from the PNAC puts names on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
delen Donating Member (134 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 01:02 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. The scariest part
about some of the neo-cons is that some of them might actually BELIEVE in what they're doing at least the old school did Bush1, Reagon et al
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
natrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 08:27 PM
Response to Original message
13. what is steal billions of dollars
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 07:45 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC