Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bush wanted Bin Laden; Neocons wanted 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 (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
AGENDA21 Donating Member (862 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 07:56 AM
Original message
Bush wanted Bin Laden; Neocons wanted Iraq
Saddam was horrendous, but beaten. He had no WMDs, no Connection to 9/11. Why did the neocons spend years gunning for Iraq and hide their real motives?

When elected, Bush was opposed to "nation building ," but Dick Cheney brought in eight fellow neocons who advocated "regime change" and re-building Iraq. This was before 9/11 and had nothing to do with Bush's war on terrorism.

Cheney's group all belonged to PNAC or IASPS.IASPS advocated regime change to increase Israeli security, while PNAC focused on our Middle East allies but named only Israel. Using 9/11, Cheney and the neocons convinced Bush to go against the long-standing conservative principles he held when elected.

http://zfacts.com/p/775.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Neil Lisst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 08:00 AM
Response to Original message
1. Read Richard Clarke's book. Bush clearly wanted to attack Iraq
from 9/11 forward. It was all he could talk about on 9/12.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmavm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 08:04 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. You're absolutely right. He was fixated on the subject of Iraq
and thought his daddy was nuts for not going on to Baghdad during Gulf War I. He also wanted the legacy of being a 'war pResident' and one-upping Daddy-O by conquering and occupying, and controlling Iraq and all the resources that entailed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Neil Lisst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 08:49 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. Clarke talks of Bush insistently, incessantly pushing for an Iraq nexus
It's clear from Clarke's book that Bush wanted to go to war THEN with Iraq, in spite of being told it was al Qaeda.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 08:54 AM
Response to Reply #1
7. Since the day he was appointed by the Supreme Court.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
antonialee839 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 08:10 AM
Response to Original message
3. I don't believe that for a second.
Edited on Thu Mar-30-06 08:11 AM by antonialee839
Zfacts needs to buy a clue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 08:30 AM
Response to Original message
4. sorry, bush IS A NEOCON
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tjwash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 08:52 AM
Response to Original message
6. Bullshit. He had a plan to invade Iraq since the day he got swore in.
Read the downing street memo for christs sake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EST Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 09:06 AM
Response to Original message
8. Bush and his fellow neoconsters did NOT want Bin Laden.
They, deliberately and cynically, fooled the American public (part of it) and avoided capturing Bin Laden. The reason for that deceitful tactic?
Had they followed through on capturing him, the game would have been over. There would have been no rationalization of the general white hot desire to destroy S.H., awe the world with US insanity and muscle flexing, and permanently inject the US into control of the middle east's politics and oil wealth. There was also the plan to use the deconstruction/reconstruction of Iraq along with a total privatization of Iraq's commercial interests and the building of a "proof of concept" utopia in the plan of dribble down economics and an absolute market based economy, the wet dream of the neocons and most libertarians.

There was no intention of completely destroying al-Qeida, the Taliban, drug trade, or any other of the heated threats designed to impress the gullible. These folks are not total idiots! (With a useful exception, here and there)
Anybody with the ability to appreciate gaming and gamesmanship will ultimately see through the smoke and will note that the very worst thing a player can do is to eliminate the competition.
Lying political manipulator understand clearly the requirement of telling the public what they want to hear, make hand silhouettes on the wall and keep the game running.

THe crime occurs when the ruling junta pretends that anyone smart enough to figure out the game is also smart enough to realize that all the lies and pretenses are necessary and only the dumbed-down masses think raising your kids to value honesty and integrity is of high survival value.
A chilling example of understanding of the games is the observation from a Russian power broker, Putin, I think, on the dubious future of the US, now that it's global rival was out of the picture.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CJCRANE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #8
14. You hit the nail on the head.
And besides, why would * want to capture a family friend? That would never do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 09:11 AM
Response to Original message
9. Absolute bullshit
No one had a bigger hard on about Iraq than georgie I gotta say some of this stuff about the U.S. being a puppet of Israel- and yes, that is the essence of this piece, is getting downright weird and bordering on that old meme that the Jews control the world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CJCRANE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #9
17. It's a diversionary tactic.
Anti-war liberals can then be tarred as "anti-semites" (using guilt by association) because they believe the "conspiracy theories".

Although Israel does have a hand in the game, the player conspicuous by its absence here is SA (and the other oil monarchies). For instance, wasn't Bandar Bush one of the first people that * told the Iraq battle plans to..?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ufomammut Donating Member (576 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 09:13 AM
Response to Original message
10. This is a crucial aspect to...
Those who refuse to acknowledge gov culbility for the crimes of 9/11: doesn't it seem a tad peculiar, not to mention convenient, that there had been massive defense budget increases and established desires and contigent plans before the fact? ...and the "attack" just happened to work out to their advantage on EVERY level?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CJCRANE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #10
19. Another big giveaway
is that 9/11 worked out to the advantage of the countries whose citiziens carried out, planned and funded the attack. These countries are now *'s main "allies" in the so-called war on terror.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ufomammut Donating Member (576 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #19
20. All sorts of strange bedfellows, eh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Virginia Dare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 09:17 AM
Response to Original message
11. More attempts at rewriting history.... EOM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Stranger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 09:50 AM
Response to Original message
12. Are DUers now denying PNAC's role in the illegal war in Iraq?
Help me out here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDebug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. No, they are not. It's the nonsense that Bush got dragged along ...
which is propaganda in that story. The reality is that Bush is part of a PNAC through his bro "I am going to steal Florida for you" Jeb.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Stranger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #13
16. That's not nonsense. Bush couldn't come up with strategy himself.
PBS FRONTLINE: THE WAR BEHIND CLOSED DOORS

Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz has been at the center of Pentagon strategic planning in both Bush administrations. A hawk on the use of U.S. military power, Wolfowitz took the lead in drafting the 1992 Defense Planning Guidance on America's military posture toward the world. The draft said that containment was an old idea, a relic of the cold war. It advocated that America should maintain military strength beyond challenge and use it to preempt provocations from rogue states with weapons of mass destruction. And it stated that, if necessary, the U.S. should be prepared to act alone. Leaked to the press, Wolfowitz's draft was rewritten and softened by then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney. Ten years later, many analysts see a strong resemblance between President Bush's 2002 National Security Strategy and Wolfowitz's 1992 draft.

Here, Barton Gellman of The Washington Post; Bill Kristol of The Weekly Standard; historian John Lewis Gaddis of Yale; and Dennis Ross, former State Department official and Mideast envoy, discuss the 1992 Wolfowitz document and its ramifications.


Chronology: Evolution of the Bush Doctrine

Jan. 26, 1998
Hawks Send Open Letter to Clinton

A group of neo-conservatives, who have formed The Project for a New American Century, argue for a much stronger U.S. global leadership exercised through "military strength and moral clarity."

In an open letter to Clinton, the group warns that the policy of containing Iraq is "dangerously inadequate." They write:

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.

The letter's signatories include Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, William Kristol, and other current members of George W. Bush's administration, including Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and Under Secretary of State for Arms Control John Bolton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JHB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #16
25. Who said he came up with it himself?
What everyone else is arguing is that the PNAC Gallery didn't divert Bush from pursuing OBL because Bush was with the PNAC program even before he was elected. Overthrowing Saddam was on his agenda from before Day 1.

Heck, the 2000 Republican Platform had a "PNAC plank" advocating aggressive (read: military) action against Saddam, back when the most the PNAC Gallery had to say about OBL was "Osama bin Who?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Stranger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #25
26. The Right Wing needs an enemy. PNAC/Neocons gave them one.
Republicans cannot function without one. The "other," the scapegoat, the "enemy," usually one of a different race, gender, religion or ethnicity, they do not function without one.

When Bush first came to power, they tried to revive the Cold War with China. They sent a recon plane over Chinese territory, and it was eventually forced to land, launching week-long crisis that went down the memory hole.

When 9/11 hit, the PNAC/Neocons were ready with a new enemy, a new "other," perfect in that it is of a different race and religion/ethnicity, and even better (they must have been salivating) in that it would feed their bloodlust, meet their foreign policy "goals" of Middle East domination and imperialism, and could be made into an endless war of secrecy, torture, hatred and mass murder.

It was a match made in Hell.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Stranger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #13
18. More . . .
PBS FRONTLINE: THE WAR BEHIND CLOSED DOORS

September 13, 2001
Wolfowitz v. Powell

Two days later, Wolfowitz expands on the president's words at a Pentagon briefing. He seems to signal that the U.S. will enlarge its campaign against terror to include Iraq:

"I think one has to say it's not just simply a matter of capturing people and holding them accountable, but removing the sanctuaries, removing the support systems, ending states who sponsor terrorism. And that's why it has to be a broad and sustained campaign."

Colin Powell and others are alarmed by what they view as Wolfowitz's inflammatory words about "ending states." Powell later responds during a press briefing: "We're after ending terrorism. And if there are states and regimes, nations that support terrorism, we hope to persuade them that it is in their interest to stop doing that. But I think ending terrorism is where I would like to leave it, and let Mr. Wolfowitz speak for himself."


Sept. 15, 2001
Camp David Meeting: Iraq Debated

Four days after the Sept. 11 attacks, Bush gathers his national security team at Camp David for a war council. Wolfowitz argues that now is the perfect time to move against state sponsors of terrorism, including Iraq. But Powell tells the president that an international coalition would only come together for an attack on Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan, not an invasion of Iraq.

The war council votes with Powell. Rumsfeld abstains. The president ultimately decides that the war's first phase will be Afghanistan. The question of Iraq will be reconsidered later.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDebug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #18
21. Bush wanted to attack from day one
He can't think of any strategy, but he is very much part of the extended PNAC family. It is not that Cheney thought of it and convinced Bush. He wanted to be a war president.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CJCRANE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #18
22. That proves that Powell
wasn't a neocon. Richard Clarke and Tony Blair also pushed for going into Afghanistan rather than Iraq (because they mistakenly thought that the war on terror was about stopping terrorism).

I think at that point * resigned himseldf to Afghanistan as a necessary stepping stone on the way to Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ufomammut Donating Member (576 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #22
23. And as usual
Our press successfully sold the idea to the populace that invading Afghanistan, and thereby inflicting misery and casualties on the people there who were already the Taliban's victims, was indeed a good thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iamthebandfanman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 09:56 AM
Response to Original message
15. didnt you know
bin laden WORKS for bush.
thats why he hasnt been caught.

so he can create terror whenever they need it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 10:20 AM
Response to Original message
24. This is an attempt to redeem Bush. Did anyone watch the Oprah interview
prior to W's Selection? Bush had his sights on Saddam - before he stepped foot into the OO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poiuyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-30-06 11:17 AM
Response to Original message
27. Bush talked about how much he wanted to invade Iraq in 1999
“He was thinking about invading Iraq in 1999,” said author and journalist Mickey Herskowitz. “It was on his mind. He said to me: ‘One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief.’ And he said, ‘My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.’ He said, ‘If I have a chance to invade….if I had that much capital, I’m not going to waste it. I’m going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I’m going to have a successful presidency.”

http://www.gnn.tv/articles/article.php?id=761

Did you catch that? "If I have a chance to invade..."
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, 06:48 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) 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