Reply #8: I agree with Soylent Brice and leveymg, above. It was the Joint Chiefs and Bush Sr. [View All]

perhaps together with some other players, who nixed attacking Iran. Rumsfeld's resignation followed shortly afterward--late 2006. And within 3-4 months, Iran was "off the table." Big buildup--everybody thinking they were going to nuke Iran--then it just went away.

But I think there was more to it than even this. Remember, Bush Sr. first formed the Iraq Study Group--which was more about Iran than Iraq. Iran was to be Part 2 of the war. Leon Panetta was a member of Bush Sr's ISG. I don't believe that Panetta was a "civilian" (when Obama appointed him to head the CIA). I think he's been CIA all along. And one of the hidden purposes of the ISG was to rescue Bush Jr from the CIA's wrath for Rumsfeld/Cheney's outings of Valerie Plame and the CIA's entire WMD counter-proliferation project. Rumsfeld/Cheney were at war with the CIA. Big rumble behind the scenes in our government, circa 2005 (during Katrina). Part of it was Bush/Rove vs. Cheney/Libby about who would take the blame for the CIA outings. Bush Jr.'s White House was in shambles at that point. I think that's why Bush Sr and Clinton came out and stood behind Bush Jr when he finally gave a Katrina press conference--to try to bolster him up, because things were out of control. And sometime in the next year, prior to the Congressional elections (Nov '06) and Rumsfeld's resignation (Dec '06), a delegation representing some heavy players--Bush Sr, the CIA (Panetta?), the Joint Chiefs and possibly some corpo and political powers--went to Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld, and made a bargain with them: They would receive immunity from impeachment/prosecution for their many crimes (and this group probably had them well-documented--including far more crimes than we know about) in exchange for not nuking Iran and for leaving the White House peacefully when the time came (and also, Rumsfeld's resignation). (I think Rumsfeld was the actual instigator of the CIA outings--Cheney just handling the political fallout--and a lot else, maybe 9/11.)

This may be where Nancy Pelosi's statement--"impeachment is off the table"--came from. I've always thought that statement was odd. (WHAT "table"?) It explains why/how attacking Iran went away so quickly; why Rumsfeld resigned with no change of policy in Iraq (the new Democratic Congress escalated it); why the government was so befuddled during Katrina (besides their wanting to "drown" our government "in the bathtub"); why Bush Jr looked so clueless during that event (eating cake with McCain, playing the guitar--I mean, really--where were his handlers?); why Cheney feels free to run around defending torture (Jeez!), and a lot of other things, including Constitutional lawyer Barack Obama's lame excuse for not prosecuting these fuckwads ("we have to look forward, not backward"). (Do we fail to prosecute a murderer because the murder took place in the past?! Criminy, Barack, you could've done better than that!)

It's just a theory, but I think it's a pretty good one. It was a formal, well-organized, behind-the-scenes counter-coup--by a powerful group who formed a coalition to do it, comprised of people with widely varying motives--some good, some bad--but with the main thrust being how to get Cheney/Rumsfeld's finger off the Armageddon button

I remember reading several articles about the Joint Chiefs' opinion of invading Iran. Iran is well-defended (unlike Iraq was). They couldn't do it without using nukes. Nukes might well have brought Russia and/or China into it, on Iran's side. Escalation to Armageddon. Using nukes is bad enough--especially since bombs often don't hit their targets exactly. Risk of serious radiation poisoning and blight of the Middle East. Then add two angry super-powers with big nuclear arsenals...* But a risk like that wouldn't stop Rumsfeld, nor Cheney. They are madmen, and they had to be curtailed, is my theory. After that date--sometime in 2006 prior to December (Rumsfeld's resignation)--Dick Cheney was no longer in charge of US foreign policy or the Pentagon. And Bush Jr had never been in charge of either. That is total Cheney bullshit.

It is quite interesting to me that Cheney is creating a narrative, on this same subject (Iran), that spins directly away from the points in my theory. He wants us to think that Bush Jr nixed his big oil war push into Iran. That is ridiculous. Bush Jr would have done anything Cheney told him to. And Cheney more than likely had plenty of dirt by which to blackmail Junior, if needed. (--which is why I think the counter-coup used their secret dirt on Cheney/Rumsfeld to threaten prosecution/impeachment and use that as the bargaining chip; they were doing the same thing to Junior. I think Daddy Bush's motive was mainly to rescue Junior from CIA retribution and from Cheney/Rumsfeld's clutches; I doubt that he cared a whole lot about irradiating Iranians, although he may have had a saner view of the matter than Cheney/Rumsfeld. Bush Sr's mode of diabolical power-mongering is subtler, more secretive, with more maintenance of the appearance of order and "playing by the rules.").

This statement of Cheney's (above) jumped out at me: "That was true from the very beginning of the administration" (that sometimes Bush Jr disagreed with him, and that he yielded to Bush Jr's opinion.) It is not believable on its face, but I wonder why he's trying to backdate his narrative to "the very beginning of the administration." Something lurking back there that he wants to blame Junior for? Or muddy up the "chain of command" for?

-------------------

*(I remember a little blip in the news--from Asia, I think--among my widespread reading during that period--a very short article, which merely said that Russia, China and (I think) India were holding a meeting on "how to curtail the US bully." This was circa 2006 amidst all the saber-rattling at Iran. I'm sorry to say I didn't think to save the article. For one thing, I thought that such a meeting would generate other news about it somewhere. But it didn't--it just vanished from the news. Anyway, it really stuck in my mind.)