Did the US have options besides invasion?

- The Bushies characterized Iraq as an imminent threat to the security of the US. Rummy told congress that the US must strike Iraq before they strike the US. Before the invasion...senators Byrd and Kennedy asked for proof as to why the US had to attack NOW.

- Why the URGENT need to attack and invade Iraq? The US had numerous satellites 'watching' Iraq and the UN inspectors finally had access to ALL of Iraq. The Bush* administration knew exactly what was happening in Iraq and that Saddam had no intention or capability to attack the US. They also knew they had been disarmed of 'weapons of mass destruction' and couldn't muster more than a weak defense if invaded.

- So then...why couldn't the Bushies wait? Did the upcoming election have anything to do with it? Did they need to act quickly to take advantage of the fear and frenzy they used to promote the case for war?

- We need to remember that the UN inspectors were IN IRAQ and doing their job when Bush* pulled them out after calling for an end to negotiation and diplomacy. Although he claimed otherwise...Bush* never used diplomacy or negotiation to try to resolve the issues. Instead...he offered threats, demands, intimidation and nationalism.

- The Bushies began in ernest with their plans to invade Iraq the day after 9-11. They intended from the beginning to use the 'war on terrorism' to get the invasion they've wanted for so long. This is also when they began to build a false case against Iraq using the pliant media and distortion of the intelligence coming from the middle east.

- The bottom line is that the Bushies KNEW Iraq didn't pose a threat to the US but invaded them anyway...using fabricated evidence and fear of terrorism to make their case. Bush* chose to bomb and invade Iraq instead of seeking alternatives to force because peace was never an option.

- Let's be clear about the issue we're debating: It's about more than the Bushies lying to rush us to war. It's about the legally of the war itself. It's against every value, principle and international law to attack a country without provocation or for reasons other than self-defense. The Bushies unnecessarily killed thousands of innocents when peaceful options were arbitrarily dismissed and taken off the table by a small group of Bush* operatives.

..Bush is now expected to answer questions about whether or not he knowingly used misleading info to lead the country into a diplomatic disaster, and these poor troops into hell. Que up a picture of Rumsfelds smug face bragging about this war as if he alone is responsible for any successes. The guy obvioulsy either has no regard for these troops, or was just plain arrogant and stupid in thinking that "Occupation" would be a cakewalk.

...on the THREAT Iraq posed to the United States. Having a 'weapons program' is not a threat that could possibly justify shock and awe and invasion. No one in DC would have voted for war to stop a 'program'.

- That's why they had to make Iraq look like an imminent THREAT. That there was any kind of threat has been proven to be an outright lie. This means the war was unnecessary and illegal.

:think:

Unless you're in the Boosh Illegal WH Occupation team.

Even before UN inspectors were sent in, they chomped at the bit, then shrubby turns about and lies that the inspectors were never let in in the first place?

Impeach Now!

- Bush* worked AGAINST the UN and tried to discredit their work. The Bushies threw scorn at any person or country that disagreed with them. They called dissent against their illegal war 'unpatriotic' and 'partisan'.

- Aggressive war without provocation or for reasons of self-defense is immoral and illegal. And it's a high crime.

After the inspectors first went in, it has been 5 days already and they have'nt found anything. Now he says we need to be more patient. It might take more time. Iraq is a very large country.

...because there was nothing to find. At least nothing that justified dropping thousands of shock and awe bombs on the Iraqi population.

- Saddam 'gassed' thousands of innocents and Bush* bombed and burned thousands more...and they both lied about the reasons for their crimes.

Tell them to go screw when they want more troops.

little airplanes that they could fly across the mighty Atlantic. Or maybe they could disassemble them and put them in boxes and then reassemble them over here. Anything so they fly over America spraying poison gas'es on us. Yes and bush* had to get that vote in before the mid-term elections. Congress needed to show a little backbone and go along with his lie.

you must first understand the objectives.

But once their minds were made up (9/12/01?), they had to do it when they did. Summer in Iraq.... if they had given inspectors any more time (as the whole world wanted) they'd have had to wait until fall and lost all their 'momentum' in scamming this to the people. Can't start an in invasion in 100-125 degree heat. So yes they had a choice, but not in timing...

The PNACers wanted invade Iraq (and Syria and Iran and...) years ago. After 9/11 there were able to convince * that it was the right thing to do. Then they made up this crap about WMDs and an imminent threat to the USA as an excuse.

Remember * has no life experience, hadn't travelled much before being appointed "President", had not had a real job in his life and is poorly eductated (his fancy ivy-leage degrees came because of his family connections, he spent his time there drinking, drugging and socializing not learning) and given that he is not very smart it was not difficult for Cheney, von Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz to convince him that their lunatic scheme for world domination was the right thing to do as part of the "War On Terra".

Iraq was perceived to be a threat, not to US National Security as claimed, but to regional stability and Israeli National Security. I don't believe this was mostly about oil, profit for Bechtel & Haliburton, Weapons of Mass Destruction, Nuclear Capability, or human rights. Nope. It was almost completely about the balance of power in the Middle East (with crony profits and the promise of an enhanced oil supply being nice side beneifts). That's basically what the PNAC (Kristol, Kagan, Wolfowitz, etc.) had been saying all along. And the PNAC boys have certainly been pulling the strings.

Apparently, they're disciples of Leo Strauss. So there is a private, esoteric agenda (Middle East Balannce of Power) obscured by lots of public, exoteric smoke screens (WMD, Nukes, Human Rights). I think this is mainly because Straussians believe the common people can't handle the truth. Bunch of elitist, just about fascist, crap if you ask me.

A while ago, I read Warrior Politics by PNAC guru Robert Kagan. If I have to condense his argument into one sentance, I do it like this: We have to show the <brown people> we have the bigger <genitals>. At least that's what I took away from the reading experience. And that's what I think this was all about - a triumphant display of the superior size of our... um, will.