General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsTAIBBI: Forget What We Know Now: We Knew Then the Iraq War Was a Joke
Forget What We Know Now: We Knew Then the Iraq War Was a Joke
By Matt Taibbi May 18, 2015
..............
.....the individuals aren't the issue. It's the general notion that the Iraq War issue was some kind of tough intellectual call that we all needed hindsight to sort out. It wasn't, and we didn't.
It was obvious even back then, to anyone who made the faintest effort to look at the situation honestly, that the invasion was doomed, wrong, and a joke.
..........
Do people not remember this stuff? George Bush got on television on October 7th, 2002 and told the entire country that Saddam Hussein was thinking of using "unmanned aerial vehicles" for "missions targeting the United States."
Only a handful of news outlets at the time, most of them tiny Internet sites, bothered to point out that such "UAVs" had a range of about 300 miles, while Iraq was 6,000 miles from New York.
What was the plan Iraqi frogmen swimming poison-filled drones onto Block Island?
..........
Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/forget-what-we-know-now-we-knew-then-the-iraq-war-was-a-joke-20150518#ixzz3aaajLZlL
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook
UPDATE TO INCLUDE:
Cheney weighs in:
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)peacebird
(14,195 posts)And we know that by "looking forward, not back" Obama let them get away with torture when they should have been taken to the Hague and prosecuted for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Think of all the Iraqi civilians whose lives were destroyed, family members killed, or maimed. And it was a con job, not faulty intelligence.
I could not have said it better.....
sigh
peace,
kp
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)KG
(28,751 posts)edhopper
(33,567 posts)it is obvious that a lot of Americans did not accept the reasons for invasion at the time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_opinion_in_the_United_States_on_the_invasion_of_Iraq#January_2003
mountain grammy
(26,619 posts)deutsey
(20,166 posts)But here's something I wrote back in February 2003 before Powell's UN presentation (but I found an excerpt I posted on DU in '05 http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5316409 ):
Bush's New "Evidence": Just a Crank Call?
BUZZFLASH READER COMMENTARY
by Dwayne Eutsey
In a Newsweek "web exclusive" Friday, the newsmagazine breathlessly reported that the Bush administration will release "supersensitive electronic intercepts" of phone conversations between Iraqi officials that the US says will prove Iraq has "repeatedly lied to United Nations inspectors."
To help build support for US plans to invade Iraq, Secretary of State Colin Powell will use these electronic intercepts in his speech this Wednesday to the UN.
While citing US officials who caution that there may be "some ambiguity about what the Iraqis are referring to in some of the conversations," the article gives the overall impression that the US is about to reveal the smoking gun evidence that thus far has eluded the Bush plan for taking over Iraq's oil reserves.
"Hold on to your hat," the article quotes one anonymous US intelligence official. "We've got it."
Not being privy to these supersecret recordings, of course, I can't say whether this alleged evidence is substantive or all a bunch of hype. Given the Bush regime's track record of "exaggeration", however, I have to say I lean toward the latter right now.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)he was up to.
It had all the hallmarks of a scam from day one until the present, and anyone who was awake knew it.
Poiuyt
(18,122 posts)I, too, wondered why he was blustering about Iraq. Then I heard some commentators talking about how GWB always compared himself to his father. He saw that GHWB became extremely popular during the first Gulf War, and GWB wanted that too. He figured he could have a successful presidency if he became a "War President."
=========
Mickey Herskowitz, the writer who originally started ghostwriting George W. Bush's biography A Charge to Keep, says that Bush was thinking about invading Iraq 2 years before 9/11 even happened. From an interview with Russ Baker:
"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."
Herskowitz said that Bush expressed frustration at a lifetime as an underachiever in the shadow of an accomplished father. In aggressive military action, he saw the opportunity to emerge from his father's shadow.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/28/65695/-Biographer-says-Bush-talked-of-invading-Iraq-2-years-BEFORE-9-11
==========
Emphasis mine.
Those words, "If I have a chance to invade," have haunted me since I first read them many years ago. They are not the words of someone trying to avoid war, but of someone itching to get into a war by any means possible.
Damn that Bush family. Jeb running for president has rekindled my distain of all of them.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)again. Hopefully it will keep Darth the Face Shooter up at night too.
JEB
(4,748 posts)gregcrawford
(2,382 posts)... the electorate is infested with room-temperature IQs that believe "Peaceniks" opposed to senseless wars are somehow unpatriotic. The GOP constantly panders to these mental defectives, getting them all revved up with brazen lies spewed by Pox News to misdirect their attention from the issues that should really concern them, namely, that the Party they so worship is the very one impoverishing them and ruining their lives. And, yes, there are far too many supposed Democrats eager to "... cry havoc! And loose the dogs of war!"
Eisenhower warned us, but no one would listen. And so evil filth like Cheney walks around free with someone else's heart, corporate psychopaths destroy the planet to enrich themselves, and those who could do something about it, won't, because they've got their hands out, too.
Great. Now I've pissed myself off...
Dark n Stormy Knight
(9,760 posts)And we should be angry.
Martin Eden
(12,863 posts)The Democratic Party and the American people desperately need leaders who are willing and able to cut through all the propaganda and speak truth to power.
No politician who voted for the Iraq war can fill that role.
wiggs
(7,811 posts)as perfect intelligence. Decisions to go to even a defensible war must legally and morally have an extremely high bar for information input.
Then factor in deliberately false and cherry picked intelligence...and take into account that preventative war is illegal...and factor in hidden agendas of establishing a base in Iraq, access to oil fields, revenge for daddy GHWB attack, a small and easily manipulated mind in the oval office, a devious smart sociopath as his closest advisor who surrounded GWB with equally smart PNAC soldiers with no consciences, a dominant corporate force that sees profit in war...and boom!
And...perhaps now that the Iraq war is revived as a topic and now that GOP candidates are desperately trying to find silver linings, let's list all the awful, heinous outcomes of the war and its aftermath. Let's enter that into the equation of war evaluation. But as usual, the GOP is excellent and narrowing and dumbing down the conversation so that all we're talking about is the quality of the intelligence and the benefits of Saddam being hung.
FlatBaroque
(3,160 posts)especially re: Bush doctrine. How pathetic that Bush has a doctrine.
Martin Eden
(12,863 posts)Taken at face value this so-called "doctrine" is based on global US military dominance and the application of "preemptive" military action that is a violation of the UN Charter. This a quest for empire that ultimately is bound to fail and is an official policy that can only be called war crime.
Behind the face value, at its core the "Bush Doctrine" is a strategy to enhance the wealth and power of the corporate ruling class by controlling the government and military apparatus. As such, it is much closer to fascism than representative democracy.
In this doctrine the function of "intelligence" is propaganda for controlling the masses, not as a decision point whether or not to invade another country. That decision is based on whether the country is cooperating with the empire in the corporate exploitation of natural resources and the furtherance of empire.
There was no "intelligence failure" regarding the decision to invade Iraq. It functioned as intended.
wiggs
(7,811 posts)create the impression that the Iraq war was 'pre-emptive'...a necessary response to a provable imminent threat. But I believe the Bush Doctrine is not just that 'pre-emptive' military action is justifiable...it has to do with accepting the idea that an illegal 'preventative' action is somehow pre-emptive.
Martin Eden
(12,863 posts)Bush falsely used the term "preemptive" which should apply only to stopping an attack that is actually being launched. "Preventive" war involves the justification that another country poses a threat of attack sometime in the future.
When Bush launched the war in March 2003 the only "imminent" threat was the UN inspectors would conclude Iraq had no active WMD programs. The official rationale for the war would have disappeared along with the mushroom clouds the American people were told to fear.
malaise
(268,916 posts)for truth
raindaddy
(1,370 posts)If I remember right there were inspectors on the ground begging to complete their job so they could provide them with the information that would've saved thousands of lives and trillions of dollars..But George W Bush and Dick Cheney couldn't wait for their report, probably knowing all along what it would contain....
underpants
(182,764 posts)Blix and his teams were in Iraq. Rumsfeld was all over the airwaves declaring that he had 104 sites that probably were for WMD manufacturing or storage. The UN repeatedly requested the list then Rummy stalled then would provide 3 or 4 sites - nothing found. The whole process started again - request, stall, nothing.
UN Resolution did not provide authorization for war but it did require all member nations to hand over all potentially useful information to Blix's teams. We, the U.S., violated the page and a half resolution THAT THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION WROTE by not turning over our info.
peace13
(11,076 posts)Two afternoons a week we stood for peace on our local corner. Signs held high. This went in for years. But sadly the busy bee Americans would not stop and take a stand. Could not take the time to make a call. How did so many of us know that this was simply a ploy to make the war profiteers rich. So many people had to die. So many had to be maimed in the name of greed. When someone says the intelligence was bad the response is, that it was intended to be!
Marr
(20,317 posts)Or the drawings of trailers that transformed into missile launchers, which were presented as evidence of same? Or the aluminum tubes that engineers kept publicly insisting were not suited to the purpose the Bush Administration claimed, while the Bush Administration said they were not only suited to the task, but suited to no other task? Or the yellow cake lie, which was pointed out within hours.
The whole thing was transparently phony, and people were pointing out multiple, provable lies in the Bush Administration's case for invasion long, long before it happened.
daleanime
(17,796 posts)Romulox
(25,960 posts)FlatBaroque
(3,160 posts)me cracking up and spilling my coffee.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)most 'experienced' Representatives fell for the scam, or worse, thought it was a great idea, or maybe, went along for personal political ambitious reasons, which also turned out to be a bad call?
Blanks
(4,835 posts)I remember the ridiculous comparisons of Saddam to Hitler.
There was no making conservatives understand that WE were the Nazis in this scenario. We were the ones attacking without provocation, we were the ones attacking to take someone else's resources.
Sure, Saddam was not a good guy, but most of the bad things he did, we set him up to do, and provided him with the necessary resources.
Sadly, it was a very dark chapter, in American history and does little to cheer up those who were against it all along to know that we were right about how wrong it was.
packman
(16,296 posts)and he was driven to invade because he needed to finish the job his dad couldn't. Georgie had a lot of demons running around in his head.
calimary
(81,210 posts)bush family Alpha Male. I think he feels totally vindicated and right and just and proper - mainly because he sure showed Daddy up. He "won" (or rather, STOLE) TWO terms in the Oval Office. Daddy only got one, after all. That family is male-dominated. It was georgie, jebbie, neil, marvin, AAAAAAAAND one surviving sister, dorothy bush (wait for it... ) KOCH!!!
Her husband: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobby_Koch who ironically doesn't seem to have a strong linkage to the koch brothers we all know and love, although I suspect he's probably somewhere on that family tree.
But it's a family that's male-dominated by gender. What do you suppose the constant undercurrent in that household was? Lots of young bucks, probably hugely competitive, fighting over Mom's affections, Dad's approval, and eventually as they grew to adulthood - I would suspect there was an inevitable deep-down wish within each of the sons to best their dad. He cast a tall shadow, what with his resume and his business dealings and the Carlyle Group and all that. Made BOATLOADS of money. So aside from his power and governmental clout and all THOSE resume credits, there was the financial empire. That's a big mountain to climb. I suspect all the testosterone in that family compelled the sons to try to prove their own worth. And top their accomplished, uber-connected dad. dubya probably feels he's the Alpha Male now. Hey, he can still remember fist-fighting with his dad, seriously, when one of their many disagreements turned physical - even with all the brain cells he's killed in his life. And they're gonna protect that status with their very lives.
I also suspect the bush clan fancies itself the New American Royal Family. I suspect, deep down, they look at the Kennedys and that legacy of super-wealth and power and influence but also a very serious sense of social obligation. All they saw was the super-wealth/power/influence of the Kennedys and the Presidency they achieved and the likelihood they would have gotten a second Presidency if Bobby Kennedy had lived. And they wanted to best that. They probably still feel superior to all that. And they want you to agree. They want ALL of us to agree. They're looking at a "Royal Dynasty" even at this very moment. Because they're already busily grooming jebbie's son george prescott bush for greater things. He's the heir apparent.
They crave power, and they intend to do EVERYTHING they can to keep it.
marym625
(17,997 posts)Democrats_win
(6,539 posts)All of the dancing doesn't hide this fact. They all believe it was right and would do it again no matter what the facts say.
Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)Lil Missy
(17,865 posts)calimary
(81,210 posts)it was the INTEL that was bad, and everybody saw the same stuff, and that's all we ever got - BULLSHIT!!!!!!
ANYBODY who wanted to could find whole supergalaxies full of information as to why the war was a bad idea and shouldn't be carried out. It was all out there for anyone to see and read about and study and learn. It was ALL out there. It just wasn't on TV because the media bowed and scraped to the White House and muzzled anybody who didn't cooperate. They were frozen out, their White House press credentials and even their seats in the press room were questioned and - in Helen Thomas's case - yanked, because she dared to ask uncomfortable questions they didn't feel they had to answer.
That was a signal they sent to the rest of the press corps, I believe. See what we can do to Helen Goddam Thomas? Whaddya suppose we can to do YER ass??? YOU DON'T WANNA KNOW, pals! They dangled that precious fucking ACCESS in front of everybody's noses in the news media. You don't play ball? Then you're frozen out. You won't get ACCESS to any of our players. Forget interviewing cheney, rummy, contradicta, wolfie, dougie feith, or any of those lovelies.
If I had been running a news division, I'd have thought they just handed me the new lead story. THAT VERY THREATENED FREEZE-OUT was the story. If my reporters were frozen out and lost access, I'd have made THAT the story and said why. The mistake that the Beltway press corpse made was to assume that if such high-level ACCESS was taken away, there'd be no one to talk to. AND THAT'S UTTER BULLSHIT!!! There were TONS of people who would have loved to have a little face time on TV and cable and radio and newspapers across the country. There were TONS of sources and credible experts and insiders who would have LOVED a chance to tell the truth. There were TONS of those individuals who yearned to get their OWN access to the media to get the truth out to the American people. They were frozen out, too. There would have been an abundance of sources and talking heads and experts from the other side to showcase in, and on, the news. There was no lack of sources!!! NO SUCH THING!!!! But oh man, we HAD to tow the White House line. It was a CRIME.
Helen Thomas had a FRONT ROW SEAT in the White House Press Room. FOR DECADES she held that seat. AP and UPI had the two key front seats for every press conference. She was the Dean of the White House Press Corps. FOR DECADES. When UPI fizzled, she STILL occupied that seat and commanded that respect. SHE was on top of the ziggurat. By tradition, she asked the first question to open the Q&A period after the opening statements were given. And also, by tradition, she closed every White House Press Conference by saying "Thank you, Mr. President." THOSE FOUR WORDS, always uttered by Helen Thomas, by tradition, were what marked the end of the press conference. And for doing her job and questioning the bullshit, her seat was yanked and she was sent to the back of the room. Anyone less (unless they were on TV, that is) would have had their press passes completely canceled. That alone made me seethe with anger, the way she was treated by these bush/cheney bastards, because she wouldn't blather the "company line." But I've lost count, by now, of all the shit they pulled in that God-Awful Squatter-stolen WAR CRIMINAL White House, that made me seethe with anger.
Also what made me seethe with anger was the sniveling cowardice of her hapless colleagues who did not speak up, did not lodge any protest or objection, and did NOT have her back. They said NOTHING. They just got out of the way when they saw her severed head rolling down the hall. COWARDS. CHICKENSHITS. They utterly abandoned her so they wouldn't lose their seats in bush/cheney's collective lap. They're an absolute disgrace to what was once an esteemed and respected profession.
They made an example of her to prove they could, and to send a GLARING message to the rest of her spineless colleagues to tow the line OR ELSE.
FUCKERS.
Johonny
(20,832 posts)and yet they claim "we" didn't know. How often do that many people in so many places in the US march against something and get ignored. They ignored us then and they ignore us now. But make no mistake. We the people knew it was bullshit. The War polled badly right up until the boots hit the ground. Only when they made the American soldier in the battle zone the face of the war did people support it. You could argue most people supported the troops rather than the war. To this day I get pissed off when people tell me "we" didn't know. They're liars. Period.
Jerry442
(1,265 posts)...in pre-invasion staging areas if they suspected that Saddam had even one nuke? Even an untested one held together with duct tape and Crazy Glue?
kairos12
(12,852 posts)Easily bled.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)The sheeple can be made to fear a Chihuahua as if it were Godzilla if the con-job is thorough enough.
Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)madokie
(51,076 posts)and the warmongers knew we knew but they didn't give two shits what we thought. Thats how it came down
reddread
(6,896 posts)the scope and volume of the criminal conspiracy that turned deaf ears to the overwhelming voice of the world in opposition can not be disregarded perpetually. Dont play along and into their pockets.
it's time.
Skittles
(153,147 posts)and anyone who tells me to "look forward" instead of holding those bastards accountable
Thespian2
(2,741 posts)war-hawks must have had their brains on hold...the plan followed by President Cheney was clearly laid out in the PNAC...