Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

When did the run up to Iraq start?

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
 
Ignacio Upton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-02-05 06:23 PM
Original message
When did the run up to Iraq start?
The buildup to the war did not start in late 2002, when Bush asked for UN Inspectors to enter, or to force Congress into voting for his war so he could capitalize in the 2002 Congressional Races. It started in December 2001-January 2002. Right after Bush let Bin Laden go at Tora Bora, the attention began to focus on Saddam. I remember that beginning in the weeks after his escape, the cable news channel graphics would show "Showdown in Iraq" or something similar. Anti-War protestors were given little air, and anyone who disputed the intelligence findings from Bush were margainalized. I remember that while Hans Blix and the UN inspectors were in Iraq doing their job, Rumsfeld and several other Defense Department and Army officials said that the invasion had to start in March because if we waited longer for inspectors to put out another report, then they would have to begin with hot weather in Iraq. From late 2001 until early 2003, the media gave Bush a free ride, possibly because they still feared him from his post-9/11 "bounce" despite the fact that his poll numbers dropped into the mid 50s in February 2003, and a majority of Americans wanted to give the inspectors more time and did not want to go in to Iraq alone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
The_Casual_Observer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-02-05 06:27 PM
Response to Original message
1. There was some kind of a war games thing that gave them an excuse
to move Centcom to Qatar along with 200,000 troops. That was in Mid 2002 I think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignacio Upton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-02-05 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Another example
PNAC's documents from 1998 are their start of intent, but the run up did not start until after 9/11. They needed 9/11 in order to scare people into going in (I'm not implying LIHOP or MIHOP, but I believe that they took advantage of the situation politically.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The_Casual_Observer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-02-05 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. The war games were in December 2002.
They kept Centcom in Qatar after the "games".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pretzel4gore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-02-05 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. they STOLE the 2k election!
who cares about 911? 911 benefitted the ONLY PEOPLE ABLE TO GET AWAY WITH IT AND DRAW ITS BENEFITS.....who probably also the thieves who stole the 2k election!
Stealing an election from the american people is taking candy from a baby if the fascists do it, as they are unlimited by any morality or tradition, which the pigmedia ruthlessly forces on the left (remember zoe baird? she was forced out of nomination to clinton admin. attorney general because her nanny wasn't registered...yet alberto gonzalez counsels torture, john bolton attended a pervert club in new york, geebush danced naked on a table in houston during his student days, bill frist tortured and killed dozens of darling little cats adopted from humane society xpressly for that purpose, tom delay disses his mother and all this stuff happens in broad daylight, yet? 'no problemo' oinks the pigmedia, 'we'll soft pedal it and shriek about something else, like avian flu or michael jackson/missing blondes girls etc, so go ahead, steal that idiot baby's candy!')
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Debi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-02-05 06:30 PM
Response to Original message
3. I think it started the day the Supreme Court handed GWB the keys
to the White House.

I think 9/11 gave him one hell of an excuse and he started plotting. (okay, not him, but Cheney, Wolfowitz, Libby, etc.) Bush just went along with it cuz then he'd get to be a wartime president.


Just my 2 cents
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignacio Upton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-02-05 06:31 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. The Neo-Cons began talking about Iraq ON 9/11
In Richard Clarke's book, he said that one of the Administration officials asking for Iraq involvement in Sept 11
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LizW Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-02-05 06:38 PM
Response to Original message
6. Look at this timeline:
http://downingstreetmemo.com/timeline/

The neocons were going to take over Iraq from day 1. It is amazing how much actual war was going on at the same time Bush was pretending there was no real decision made to go in. Bushco was transferring funding, massing forces and bombing the hell out of Iraq LONG before the Congressional vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Debi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-02-05 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Makes me sick
:scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ktowntennesseedem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-02-05 06:55 PM
Response to Original message
9. Jan 21, 2001.
Just as soon as everyone recovered from the inaugural hangover.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stillcool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-02-05 07:02 PM
Response to Original message
10. Some good info here:
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/

February 1, 2001

The Bush White House holds its second National Security Council meeting. Like the first meeting (see (January 30, 2001)), the issue of regime change in Iraq is a central topic. Officials discuss a memo titled “Plan for post-Saddam Iraq,” which talks about troop requirements, establishing war crimes tribunals, and divvying up Iraq's oil wealth. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld argues that by removing Saddam Hussein, the Bush administration would “demonstrate what US policy is all about.” It would also help transform the Middle East, he claims. According to Paul O'Neill, Rumsfeld talks at the meeting “in general terms about post-Saddam Iraq, dealing with the Kurds in the north, the oil fields, the reconstruction of the country's economy, and the ‘freeing of the Iraqi people.’

December 2001

US General Tommy Franks tells Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld that US planes patrolling the Iraq “no-fly” zones should begin “spurts of activity followed by periods of inactivity.” “We want the Iraqis to become accustomed to military expansion, and then apparent contraction,” he later recalls telling the secretary. “As Phase I is completed, we could flow steadily for the next sixty days, while continuing spikes of activity to lend credence to our deception. During the sixty days we would increase kinetic strikes in the no-fly zones to weaken Iraq's integrated air defenses.”
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressivejazz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-02-05 07:03 PM
Response to Original message
11. I seem to remember Rove starting it...
...in about January, 2002 by announcing to a conservative audience that the 2002 elections would be centered on war with Iraq.
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 Sun May 05th 2024, 03:05 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