Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

PNAC ASKED CLINTON TO INVADE IRAQ IN 1998

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
 
noahmijo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 06:22 PM
Original message
PNAC ASKED CLINTON TO INVADE IRAQ IN 1998
Edited on Wed Sep-21-05 06:25 PM by noahmijo
This is more for our less than 24/7 bloodhound members of DU, but we should all be aware of this fact.

The fact that these sons a bitches had Iraq in their songs LONG BEFORE 9/11

NOTE THE SIGNERS OF THIS LETTER AND THEN PUT TWO AND TWO TOGETHER

January 26, 1998

The Honorable William J. Clinton
President of the United States
Washington, DC

Dear Mr. President:

We are writing you because we are convinced that current American policy toward Iraq is not succeeding, and that we may soon face a threat in the Middle East more serious than any we have known since the end of the Cold War. In your upcoming State of the Union Address, you have an opportunity to chart a clear and determined course for meeting this threat. We urge you to seize that opportunity, and to enunciate a new strategy that would secure the interests of the U.S. and our friends and allies around the world. That strategy should aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power. We stand ready to offer our full support in this difficult but necessary endeavor.

The policy of “containment” of Saddam Hussein has been steadily eroding over the past several months. As recent events have demonstrated, we can no longer depend on our partners in the Gulf War coalition to continue to uphold the sanctions or to punish Saddam when he blocks or evades UN inspections. Our ability to ensure that Saddam Hussein is not producing weapons of mass destruction, therefore, has substantially diminished. Even if full inspections were eventually to resume, which now seems highly unlikely, experience has shown that it is difficult if not impossible to monitor Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons production. The lengthy period during which the inspectors will have been unable to enter many Iraqi facilities has made it even less likely that they will be able to uncover all of Saddam’s secrets. As a result, in the not-too-distant future we will be unable to determine with any reasonable level of confidence whether Iraq does or does not possess such weapons.

Such uncertainty will, by itself, have a seriously destabilizing effect on the entire Middle East. It hardly needs to be added that if Saddam does acquire the capability to deliver weapons of mass destruction, as he is almost certain to do if we continue along the present course, the safety of American troops in the region, of our friends and allies like Israel and the moderate Arab states, and a significant portion of the world’s supply of oil will all be put at hazard. As you have rightly declared, Mr. President, the security of the world in the first part of the 21st century will be determined largely by how we handle this threat.

Given the magnitude of the threat, the current policy, which depends for its success upon the steadfastness of our coalition partners and upon the cooperation of Saddam Hussein, is dangerously inadequate. The only acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility that Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction. In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake military action as diplomacy is clearly failing. In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. That now needs to become the aim of American foreign policy.

We urge you to articulate this aim, and to turn your Administration's attention to implementing a strategy for removing Saddam's regime from power. This will require a full complement of diplomatic, political and military efforts. Although we are fully aware of the dangers and difficulties in implementing this policy, we believe the dangers of failing to do so are far greater. We believe the U.S. has the authority under existing UN resolutions to take the necessary steps, including military steps, to protect our vital interests in the Gulf. In any case, American policy cannot continue to be crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council.

We urge you to act decisively. If you act now to end the threat of weapons of mass destruction against the U.S. or its allies, you will be acting in the most fundamental national security interests of the country. If we accept a course of weakness and drift, we put our interests and our future at risk.

Sincerely,

Elliott Abrams Richard L. Armitage William J. Bennett

Jeffrey Bergner John Bolton Paula Dobriansky

Francis Fukuyama Robert Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad

William Kristol Richard Perle Peter W. Rodman

Donald Rumsfeld William Schneider, Jr. Vin Weber

Paul Wolfowitz R. James Woolsey Robert B. Zoellick

http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 06:24 PM
Response to Original message
1. I forgot what PNAC stands for
puerile nutjob agitating creeps?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bonito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. can p
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starbucks Anarchist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 11:55 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. Project For A New American Century.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-05 02:58 PM
Response to Reply #7
12.  i like "can P" better. you can do test strips with them.
so, it begs the question - where has the democratic leadership been, seeing the inroads made by this group, typically based on lies and misrepresentation?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paineinthearse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 06:28 PM
Response to Original message
3. PNAC 101 - also for our "less than 24/7 bloodhound members..."
Edited on Wed Sep-21-05 06:29 PM by paineinthearse
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newswolf56 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 06:41 PM
Response to Original message
4. Interesting. Given that the (now-obvious) clandestine purpose...
of removing Saddam was the imposition of Islamic theocracy on Iraq -- essentially turning Iraq into another Saudi Arabia or Iran -- this suggests the alliance between the global oligarchy and the forces of theocracy (whither Islamic or Christian) may be far older than we suspect. While Conservatives have always been the oligarchy's ultimate ideological pointmen (gendered term deliberate), the open alliance between Conservatives and theocrats is a relatively recent development (though it also marks the restoration of the very oldest mode of oppression -- religion as Inquisitorial tyrant and/or the opiate of the masses: pseudo-spirituality as bread and circuses). The following link is thus especially relevant: http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,,1398055,00.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jazzjunkysue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 07:58 PM
Response to Original message
5. I thought everyone knew about PNAC. It's why I believe MIHOP
That's what Monica and Starr were all about: They had to arrest control of the country from the dems before the oil ran out. They had to take the oil and control the middle east to make the last of the oil profits.

These are the reguees from the Red Soviet threat american team. After the USSR fell under it's own weight, without warning, these losers, called "the Crazies" by the Reagan GOP, had no reason to stay in the cabinet, and were sent packing. They didn't like that too much, and hid in Cheney's basement, like Pinkey and the Brain, and plotted to take over the world.

Well, kids, that's what Iraq was: A first assault. That's what Iran is: The second leg of the PNAC agenda. Syria and Jordan and maybe even Saudi Arabia are on the list. These people are delusional, and now, they're running the world:

Wolfowitz has the world bank, Condi is our diplomat, Bolton is our ambassador to the UN, cheney is the real president. they're all the original PNAC, and their own personal power was always the agenda.

When you know about PNAC, everything that's happened makes sense.

IMPEACH! IMPEACH PNAC!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noahmijo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 11:54 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. I'd be amazed if 1 out of 10 Americans knew what PNAC even stood for
I say that with a very heavy heart.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TankLV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-05 12:04 AM
Response to Original message
8. We know, we know. This is OLD news. VERY OLD news.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noahmijo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-05 12:09 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. Hey Snooty Mcfugal I posted this for those who might not have heard of
this yet. Believe it or not there are people even on DU who never saw this before who just maybe might want to bring it up the next time they have to argue with freepers.

If you see something you've read before do what most of us do just move along.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-05 12:09 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. But we have lots of new DU'ers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-05 12:10 AM
Response to Original message
11. Holy cannoli, that I did not know!
Always something new and disgusting to learn about these people.
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, 12:35 PM
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