Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Let's get it straight. Bush and Friends wanted to take Iraq since Day 1

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
 
ck4829 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 02:31 PM
Original message
Let's get it straight. Bush and Friends wanted to take Iraq since Day 1
PNAC
Affiliated with Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rumsfeld's top deputy Paul Wolfowitz and Bush's brother Jeb urged then-President Clinton to invade Iraq back in January 1998.

The Council for National Policy
Bush and the CNP meet for the first time in October of 1999. It is not known what they discussed.

The Bush Administration meets with the secretive Council for National Policy to deal with Saddam in May of 2002. The person who wrote about the Bush-CNP meeting, Dr. Alexandr Nemets, reported that among the 500 "prominent" attendees, "several high-ranking officials in the Bush administration made speeches and participated in panel discussions." He reported a complete uniformity of judgment – at a meeting attended by Bush administration officials when the Bush administration would still pretend for several months to try diplomacy – that Saddam needed to be deposed with military force.

And Bush himself
"One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief. My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it. 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." - George W. Bush
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1028-01.htm

The Bush Administration began making plans for an invasion of Iraq, including the use of American troops, within days of President Bush's inauguration in January of 2001.
http://www.derechos.org/nizkor/iraq/doc/bush3.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
GreenArrow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 02:34 PM
Response to Original message
1. they wanted it
since before day one
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tk2kewl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. yep
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LightningFlash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 02:47 PM
Response to Original message
3. Yep connecting with the DSM, this has become damning evidence.
I really want to hear mass protests soon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RBHam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 02:48 PM
Response to Original message
4. Now, if only CNN would discover PNAC...
Which is funny, since Bill Schneider is a member of both...

HEY!

:wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Just Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. *gulp*
How the hell did I miss that little gem? Geez. x(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LightningFlash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. No wonder he's a master spin artist...
He works for PNAC propaganda itself, the crazy fourth reich operation who created the war! :crazy: :crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dbeach Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 02:54 PM
Response to Original message
5. "Price of Loyalty"
is about Paul O' Neil ,former sec. treasury ,who says when he first walked into a bushco meeting..to present his factoids about helping the economy..All the buseheviks wanted to discuss was Iraq jan 2001

O' Neil was considered a maverick by the stepfords and was actually fired by the chimp

O' Neil toured Africa with Bono and had suggestons for helping which bush did not even read

sound familar..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meppie-meppie not Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. if O'Neil had wanted the baby turd to read his report he should have known
Edited on Tue Jun-14-05 03:41 PM by meppie-meppie not
better and put the report in a cartoon format! Everybody knows the buffoon only "reads" pictures :banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #5
14. Cheney energy docs with maps of Iraqi oil fields and lists of "suitors"
give me a break - we've known all this all along - what took everybody so long?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dbeach Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 04:30 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. THAT STINKER KENNY BOY
and his bilion dollar grin were at the cheny enegy fleec-up as kennny was angling for thoese same attendees to illegally force blackouts in CA and squeeze the taxpayers and shaerholders for billions more

I really hope there is a hell cuz bush/cheney,kenny boy ,skilling..all the neo-cons and busheviks will overflow the place

BUT they can ALWAYS call Hallburton and Bectel to add more space
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ms. Clio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 04:02 PM
Response to Original message
9. Check out this fantastic timeline, "The Path to War"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ck4829 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Incredible
Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 04:05 PM
Response to Original message
11. "It's the Kissinger plan" - Mother Jones - March/April 2003
Edited on Tue Jun-14-05 04:13 PM by Stephanie

http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2003/10/ma_273_01.html

The Thirty-Year Itch
Three decades ago, in the throes of the energy crisis, Washington's hawks conceived of a strategy for US control of the Persian Gulf's oil. Now, with the same strategists firmly in control of the White House, the Bush administration is playing out their script for global dominance.

By Robert Dreyfuss
March/April 2003 Issue
P L U S :
Oil and Arms: An In-Depth Look

If you were to spin the globe and look for real estate critical to building an American empire, your first stop would have to be the Persian Gulf. The desert sands of this region hold two of every three barrels of oil in the world -- Iraq's reserves alone are equal, by some estimates, to those of Russia, the United States, China, and Mexico combined. For the past 30 years, the Gulf has been in the crosshairs of an influential group of Washington foreign-policy strategists, who believe that in order to ensure its global dominance, the United States must seize control of the region and its oil. Born during the energy crisis of the 1970s and refined since then by a generation of policymakers, this approach is finding its boldest expression yet in the Bush administration -- which, with its plan to invade Iraq and install a regime beholden to Washington, has moved closer than any of its predecessors to transforming the Gulf into an American protectorate.

<snip>

Ever since the oil shocks of the 1970s, the United States has steadily been accumulating military muscle in the Gulf by building bases, selling weaponry, and forging military partnerships. Now, it is poised to consolidate its might in a place that will be a fulcrum of the world's balance of power for decades to come. At a stroke, by taking control of Iraq, the Bush administration can solidify a long-running strategic design. "It's the Kissinger plan," says James Akins, a former U.S. diplomat. "I thought it had been killed, but it's back."

<snip>

In 1975, while Akins was ambassador in Saudi Arabia, an article headlined "Seizing Arab Oil" appeared in Harper's. The author, who used the pseudonym Miles Ignotus, was identified as "a Washington-based professor and defense consultant with intimate links to high-level U.S. policymakers." The article outlined, as Akins puts it, "how we could solve all our economic and political problems by taking over the Arab oil fields bringing in Texans and Oklahomans to operate them." Simultaneously, a rash of similar stories appeared in other magazines and newspapers. "I knew that it had to have been the result of a deep background briefing," Akins says. "You don't have eight people coming up with the same screwy idea at the same time, independently.

"Then I made a fatal mistake," Akins continues. "I said on television that anyone who would propose that is either a madman, a criminal, or an agent of the Soviet Union." Soon afterward, he says, he learned that the background briefing had been conducted by his boss, then-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. Akins was fired later that year.

<snip>

In the 1970s, America's military presence in the Gulf was virtually nil, so the idea of seizing control of its oil was a pipe dream. Still, starting with the Miles Ignotus article, and a parallel one by conservative strategist and Johns Hopkins University professor Robert W. Tucker in Commentary, the idea began to gain favor among a feisty group of hardline, pro-Israeli thinkers, especially the hawkish circle aligned with Democratic senators Henry Jackson of Washington and Daniel Patrick Moynihan of New York.

Eventually, this amalgam of strategists came to be known as "neoconservatives," and they played important roles in President Reagan's Defense Department and at think tanks and academic policy centers in the 1980s. Led by Richard Perle, chairman of the Pentagon's influential Defense Policy Board, and Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, they now occupy several dozen key posts in the White House, the Pentagon, and the State Department. At the top, they are closest to Vice President Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who have been closely aligned since both men served in the White House under President Ford in the mid-1970s. They also clustered around Cheney when he served as secretary of defense during the Gulf War in 1991. <more>

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=110&topic_id=80&mesg_id=80

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. Which became the National Security Strategy
and the Bush Doctrine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dbeach Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 04:42 PM
Response to Reply #11
16. Yes and worse..back to 60s


Neo-conthradals want to take humanity back in time to primitive states of dog eat dog with the elite neo-cons in control

Strauss hated the Renaissance and enlightenemnt..he taught that the privleged must rule the masses to keep society




http://www.counterpunch.org/boyle08022003.html

""My Alma Mater is a Moral Cesspool"
Neo-Cons, Fundies, Feddies and the University of Chicago

It is now a matter of public record that immediately after the terrible tragedy of September 11, 2001, U.S. Secretary of War Donald Rumsfeld and his pro-Israeli "Neoconservative" Deputy Paul Wolfowitz began to plot, plan, scheme and conspire to wage a war of aggression against Iraq by manipulating the tragic events of September 11th in order to provide a pretext for doing so. Of course Iraq had nothing at all to do with September 11th or supporting Al-Qaeda . But that made no difference to Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and the numerous other pro-Israeli Neo-cons in the Bush Jr. administration.

These pro-Israeli Neo-cons had been schooled in the Machiavellian/Nietzschean theories of Professor Leo Strauss, who taught political philosophy at the University of Chicago in their Department of Political Science. The best expose of Strauss's pernicious theories on law, politics, government, for elitism, and against democracy can be found in two scholarly books by the Canadian Professor Shadia B. Drury: The Political Ideas of Leo Strauss (1988); Leo Strauss and the American Right (1999). I entered the University of Chicago in September of 1968 shortly after Strauss had retired. But I was trained in Chicago's Political Science Department by Strauss's foremost protege, co-author, and literary executor Joseph Cropsey. Based upon my personal experience as an alumnus of Chicago's Political Science Department (A.B., 1971, in Political Science), I concur completely with Professor Drury's devastating critique of Strauss. I also agree with her penetrating analysis of the degradation of the American political process by Chicago's Straussian cabal."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 04:08 PM
Response to Original message
12. Bush Doctrine 3/2001
Frank Gaffney:

"The early indications are that Mr. Bush intends to make a main feature of his Administration the use of American power and influence to challenge and delegitimize the governments of those nations who are enemies of freedom."

"...the sorts of steps long advocated by senior members of the new Bush team would -- if adopted as part of a comprehensive effort -- have the greatest chance of undermining and ultimately bringing an end to the Iraqi despot's hold on power."

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/frankjgaffneyjr/fg20010313.shtml

It's not important to prove PNAC. There's 235,000 responses for "Bush Doctrine". THEY say it's all about expanding American influence, expanding the American perimeter, changing the Middle East politics. All we have to do is use their own words against them with the Downing Street Memo as proof positive. Iraq is about much more than Saddam, it's the first step in global American domination. Shock & Awe wasn't intended to intimidate the Iraqi's, it was intended to make the world shudder at the raw power of American unilateralism and military might. More like Bush shows up at Sturgis on a moped.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tibbiit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 04:52 PM
Response to Original message
17. They also have ZERO
They have zero plans of ever leaving. THey dont care what anyone thinks , and they can back that up with the corp. media, and two other branches of government carrying water for them.

In the "planning" cooked up by them for Iraq, was the plan to never leave.

So people can yak all they want about "when the soldiers leave" and exit strategys... they DONT CARE what you think... they are there for good.
tib
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
realFedUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 04:54 PM
Response to Original message
18. Find out when business arrangements were made with Halliburton
Parsons et al and when the contracts were signed
at the State Dept. (Oct. 2002) to remake Iraq
in our image.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Triana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
19. bu$hit: "I did not have sex with those Minutes...
...The Downing Street Minutes"

SURE you didn't, george.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-05 12:16 AM
Response to Original message
20. Now that America is pissed off, they should read this.
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 Sat May 04th 2024, 07:39 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