Bush Adviser Pipes: "Civil War in Iraq would not be that bad

[Tom Joad]

for our Interests." Who is the "our" that he refers to? Certainly not that of the working people of the Untied States, or that of the Iraqi people, but of an elite who want to expand US empire in the region.

One has to give Daniel Pipes credit for one thing, the transparency of his hate for the people of the Middle East (excepting Israel).

Who is this man? Daniel Pipes was appointed by President Bush during the Summer Congressional recess in August 2003 (to avoid a problem with Congress, why should Bush's appointments be questioned by anyone?) to the the board of United States Institute of Peace, a Congressionally sponsored think tank dedicated to "the peaceful resolution of international conflicts." He served there until the end of 2004. Before that Pipes was a key adviser to Bush Jr. in supporting an escalation in the war against Iraq.

For those few Americans who still believe that the war was about "liberating Iraq" from Saddam, one should look at what Pipes has said in the past, and what he is saying now. His motives are certainly not humanitarian.

In the April 27, 1987 issue of The New Republic, Mr. Pipes and Laurie Mylroie authored an article supporting the arming of the "hideous totalitarian thug" Saddam with military arms, during the Iraq/Iran war. You can read a copy of that here: Tomjoad.org (scroll down a bit and click for the pdf copy... not perfect, but straight out of the public library. Since it is for educational purposes and no profit, it is fair use).

What is he saying now about the growing violence in Iraq among different groups?
It is not really that bad, and might work for "our" interests.
* Instead of attacking coalition forces, warring sectarian groups will attack each other!

* Effectively shutdown the rush to the formation of Democratic governments in middle east countries that have so far been electing and legitimizing radical Islamists!

* Reduce Western casualties outside Iraq {because} when Sunni terrorists target Shiites and vice-versa, non-Muslims are less likely to be hurt!

* Draw Syrians and Iranians into the conflict which increases the possibility of American confrontation with those two states!
See here for source

It is true that Saddam was a disaster in many ways for Iraq and most of the world. However what does it say about the Bush regime when it trusts so much the words of Pipes, who obviously has no real concern for the lives of the Iraqi people, and sees the people of the Middle East as he would pieces on a chess board. After all, Pipes saw no problem with arming Saddam when he was killing the most people, both Iraqi soldiers and Iranian people. To Pipes, such people were expendable. Pipes is no less a monster than Saddam.

[deadparrot]

1. Yeah, it's not like they're *people* or anything...nt

[HeeBGBz]

4. Green plastic army men (and women)

That's how they see them.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

2. FOX has been pimping this exact sentiment recently too. Since Civil

War appears inevitable now, they have to paint it as "not that bad" or actually "good!"

[Tom Joad]

5. Bares their true intentions, doesn't it. Let's kick this and make this

Pipes exposure day at DU!

[rodeodance]

8. i will have to listen in once in a while.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

3. Pipes is a virulently anti-Muslim PNAC wack job.

I remember him being interviewed as an ostensible Middle East "expert" on some cable news shows before the Iraq invasion. He's one of those people who acts so rational but you can tell he's totally crazy and hateful -- always made my skin crawl. I just got a visceral feeling that this is an evil dude.

[Tom Joad]

29. The ADL supports Pipes. What is wrong with the ADL???

http://www.tomjoad.org/adl_supportspipes.htm

I wish i were making this stuff up. But its the sorry truth. Seems like the ADL lost its way since it stood against all kinds of racism. Now it just stands for promoting Israeli policies.

[ProfessorGAC]

33. He's Intractably Trapped In Two Dimensions

X therefore Y is the only correlation of which he's capable of grasping. When the nuance goes beyond the simple depth of zero, he's braindead. His reputation as a thinker is grotesquely overstated.
The Professor

[central scrutinizer]

6. Get rid of those pesky people

goddamit - they are building houses on top of our oil!!!

[Wordie]

7. K&R. There is so much that goes below the radar. Thanks for keeping us

informed, Tom. How Bush had the gall to put him on the board of the Institute of Peace is appalling. The only way was through that recess appointment, because any exposure of what this guy really stands for would have meant he would never have been confirmed. (At least, that's what I'd like to believe.)

Recommend this, everybody, so more DUers can learn about Pipes, and GWB's conception of "peace."

[Marie26]

22. He did WHAT?

Sometimes I think Bush does stuff like this specifically to piss people off. He appoints Bolton to the UN, Wolfowitz to the World Bank, and smirks.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

9. I'd like to know what rock he and Laurie Mylroie crawled out from under.

More info on this loon from Mother Jones: http://www.motherjones.com/news/update/2003/05/we_420_01.html

Looks like he's a good pal of another creep, Frank Gaffney. Not surprising.

[jazzjunkysue]

10. I've always said, PNAC wants to destablilize the middle east.

Then they can put in all the pipelines and anything else they want with no press or government to stop them or even notice.

[DainBramaged]

12. PNAC thinks they can bring about the End of Days

It's plain as day. They WANT a Crusade. They WANT a Hundred Years War. They WANT to see if they can bring about the prophecies of Revelations.

They are all fucking insane.

[HeeBGBz]

13. Waiting for the Great Pumpkin to arrive. eom

[Deja Q]

21. And they're doing a good job at it, wouldn't you say?

[Warren Stupidity]

32. Not PNAC - they want a new Pax Romana

They have aligned themselves with the Fundaloon End Timers. The PNACers just have the more mundane 'rule the world' megalomania.

However the motivation for destabilization is out there and is valid. All the 'we just want peace and stability but we are incompetent' nay-sayers need to pay attention. 'We' never intended peace and stability after we toppled Saddam. 'We' did the analysis in 91 - out with Saddam in with an Iraqi Shiite theocracy. 'We' voted no back then and 'we' didn't suddenly get amnesia 12 years later. There will be no stable shiite theocratic regime in Iraq. That regime would be aligned with Iran and would be the basis for a dominant shiite block in the region, led by Iran and in control of a vast amount of the dwindling cheap oil resources of the planet. That prospect is simply not in our game plan and the rest of us had better get a grip on that reality. Keep dreaming that what we have seen over the last three years is just the result of bumbling incompetency. Keep telling yourself that, if you find it comforting, but it is the narrative they want you to believe because the reality is vile beyond comprehension.

[Wordie]

24. It's not just you that says that...PNACers have openly said that too!

They didn't mention the part about the oil pipelines, but they spelled out their intentions in "A Clean Break."

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

11. le kick

[mom cat]

14. K&R ...Also K&R this interview with Robert Fisk:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x590705

Thanks for the information on Pipes.

[Wordie]

37. The Fisk article is interesting...thanks!

[Marie26]

15. Didn't he have something to do

w/those Muhammad cartoons? Or am I imagining that?

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Scurrilous]

31. Speaking of that Danish newspaper:

"You have to admit Germany its clear right to rid itself of its Jews. But one must insist that it happens in a decent manner." -- From an editorial in the Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, on the events of Kristallnacht, 9 Nov 1938

http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/news/2006/02/quote_of_the_we_1.html

[mom cat]

34. You are imagining that. Robert Fisk in an eminent reporter with 30

years of experience reporting in the Middle East. I highly reccomend that you listen to this audio.

[Canuckistanian]

16. This from the man who brought us the "cartoon" protests

http://www.mereislam.info/2006/02/danish-cartoons-double-standards-and.html

Danish Cartoons, Double-Standards and Daniel Pipes

Well surprise, surprise, surprise. Daniel Pipes, the world's most prominent anti-Muslim hate-monger, has finally piped up and posted an article giving his point-of-view on the on-going Danish cartoon saga. He's obviously trying to capitalize on the current cartoon crisis in order to put forward his xenophobic agenda, which a close analysis of his Cartoons and Islamic Imperialism article makes rather clear. Based on the fact that he's the respected spokesman for so many Islamophobes around the world, you'd think he'd be able to articulate a decent defense for his paranoid positions. Please try to keep this in mind when you see how easy it is to un-spin his half-baked assertions—and it is always easy when the facts are on your side. So without further adieu, here's what Daniel Pipes, glaring hypocrite and Islamophobe extraordinaire, had to say:

"Will the West stand up for its customs and mores,
including freedom of speech, or will Muslims
impose their way of life on the West? Ultimately,
there is no compromise: Westerners will either
retain their civilization, including the right to
insult and blaspheme, or not."

It’s quite ironic that he finds it so easy to ignore the fact that eleven European countries (including ones that he lists as standing with Denmark in his article), as well as his own State of Israel, have laws which make public denial of the Holocaust a crime. Based on Pipes' own thinking, such an undermining of free speech should have spelled the end for Western Civilization. Why didn't Pipes whine that this violated the Western "customs and mores" that he claims to value so highly? Without a decent response to these questions (and if he had one, he would have used it), I'll just say that the "H-word" certainly comes to mind.

Fucking hypocrite...

[Scurrilous]

17. K & R...

Thanks for posting this Tom. :thumbsup:

[Hardrada]

19. If there were a revolution this is one of the dudes

who'd have to get out really fast!!

[tatertop]

20. K & R

wow

[Tom Joad]

23. Don't forget to bookmark the page for Pipes article.

http://www.tomjoad.org/pipes.htm

Keep it handy for your cousin/coworker/brother-in-law/ who still believes that Bush went in there with the best of intentions. If he had advisors who supported arming Saddam, I think that negates that whole arguement.

[Wordie]

36. Good idea...thanks! eom

[seabeyond]

25. would not be that bad... except all the dead innocence.... n/t

[Tom Joad]

28. For the likes such as Pipes, dead Iraqis is different than dead

people.

[Rocknrule]

26. The Holocaust wasn't all that bad either

:sarcasm: :argh:

[Raydawg1234]

27. wait a minute. First we went to Iraq to find WMD. Then it turns out we

went to spread freedom. Now their telling us we went to provoke a civil war?????

[Random_Australian]

30. Well, look at it this way

before it became indeniable to the general public, the repubs suddenly stopped talking of WMD... cos they have the intel. Now they're changing to 'civil war's a good thing' therefore if Iraq does go into civil war soon, that's all the statistaical correspondence you need to wacth the hawks and whatnot and when they suddenly change tack, use that to guess what intel they have but their hiding.
Then, kick the bastards out, and STOP THIS MADNESS! If the world thinks that America let civil war happen (Which it will), that's what the next generation of Iraqis will think... and I shudder to think what they'll do about it.

[ProfessorGAC]

35. Well, Which Reason Is Best For You?

It's sort of an excuse smorgasbord. Whichever excuse works best for each of us is the one we should believe, i guess.
The Professor