General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWHY WERE WE EVER IN IRAQ?
...................
After all these years I still have no idea what it was all about.
Even at the time conservatives would occasionally admit that the WMD rationale was horseshit. It was as if each had their own individual Great Game reason for it. There were as many reasons for the Iraq war as there were supporters of it.
I suppose, ultimately, it came down to blowing up brown people and pissing off liberals. So it was quite a success, really.
http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/
It was much more personal to bush than that.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)An American empire in the Middle East has been a tenet of RW ideology since the First Gulf War at least. And the purpose of that empire would be to control the world oil supply.
The reason the today's GOP is sniping at Obama for the withdrawal from Iraq is because it makes their dream of an oil empire that much less plausible, not because of W's freudian "daddy issues".
comipinko
(541 posts)with out the shrub's "daddy issue".
gateley
(62,683 posts)before we even knew HOW/WHY we were going in?
I bet they were absolutely gleeful when 9/11 occurred - that gave them the excuse to feed the masses.
I'm sure Bush was all for payback, but not sure how they would have pulled it off w/o 9/11.
opihimoimoi
(52,426 posts)What a loss for the Nation... 4500 priceless lives and 1 trillion...add 2more trillion all is done with soldiers injuries rehab
worse President in all of Human History...most evil..
backscatter712
(26,355 posts)Maybe it was partially the grudge W had against Saddam, but mostly it was Cheney, Rumsfeld & co. that used the war to line their pockets and their cronies'.
GoCubsGo
(32,079 posts)We could have bought that oil for much less than it cost us to go to war. The Iraq war was nothing but a raid on our treasury by the MIC.
Response to GoCubsGo (Reply #40)
newspeak This message was self-deleted by its author.
G_j
(40,366 posts)Scuba
(53,475 posts)comipinko
(541 posts)Yup, >4000 Americans died because * felt he needed to prove himself to his daddy. That is all.
MicaelS
(8,747 posts)And Bush II decided to whack back. Simple as that.
doc03
(35,325 posts)shraby
(21,946 posts)Attack the least able to defend themselves, then move on to other middle East countries. Make them all "Democratic" at the point of a gun.
Democracy at gunpoint!
JustAnotherGen
(31,810 posts)With the quote you have. . .
But remember the declaration of principles between Iraq and the US? Back in 2007? Snapshot from NPR's site:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18358334
I've always thought that it was to have a permanent U.S. base in Iraq. I think when I was watching No End In Sight a few years back - I also got it was to spend a lot of freaking money to build and obnoxious over the top U.S. Embassy in Iraq.
Some people voted for Bush, the Supreme Court had to basically declare him President due to hanging chads and sneaky behavior by the Republicans in Florida, some more people voted for Bush in 2004 (but look at Ohio before we say he won) . . . but here I am in my populist progressive la la land having to pay for what those idiots deliberately and maliciously broke for a permanent US base, funneling money to Haliburton and the company formerly known as Blackwater, Oil (though I paid $3.09 for gas on Sunday), etc. etc. and so on and so forth.
Response to kpete (Original post)
HereSince1628 This message was self-deleted by its author.
HughBeaumont
(24,461 posts)newspeak
(4,847 posts)has financially recovered since our fabricated war. The whole "war on terror" BS has done nothing for the american people, either. Especially, when it comes to our civil liberties. If they wanted to take out those responsible, it would have been focused hits; not warring with the populace, especially in Iraq.
And the PNAC's supposed objective of making ME countries democratic, is a BS joke. Any dictator will do if they play the corporate puppet. Any democratically elected leader who cares more about his/her people than global corporate interest usually gets ousted or killed.
It's unfortunate people didn't heed what little boots said before he was selected. He thought his daddy would have been reelected if he was in war. If daddy could have prolonged iraq or started another little war, he could be the second term war president. And, look how well it worked out for little boots.
What's really sick is they use us- our money, our lives, for their own agenda.
rurallib
(62,406 posts)social programs like health care
Tippy
(4,610 posts)Bush, Cheney and the SCOTUS hate's America, Americans, Liberals the list goes on and on...
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)If we didn't stop the Islamobaathifascicommiedicatership over there we would have been fighting them over here.
Everybody knows this.
sarcasmo
(23,968 posts)Initech
(100,062 posts)MH1
(17,595 posts)with kickbacks going back to Cheney et al.
Initech
(100,062 posts)lpbk2713
(42,753 posts)And then to award Billion$ in emergency no-bid contracts to Halliburton and other favored BushCo contractors.
Botany
(70,489 posts)@ the same time he was meeting w/ his energy task force. Sec. of Treasury (Fired) wrote that in his book
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/09/60minutes/main592330.shtml
"And that came up at this first meeting, says O'Neill, who adds that the discussion of Iraq continued at the next National Security Council meeting two days later.
He got briefing materials under this cover sheet. "There are memos. One of them marked, secret, says, 'Plan for post-Saddam Iraq,'" adds Suskind, who says that they discussed an occupation of Iraq in January and February of 2001.
Based on his interviews with O'Neill and several other officials at the meetings, Suskind writes that the planning envisioned peacekeeping troops, war crimes tribunals, and even divvying up Iraq's oil wealth."
tjwash
(8,219 posts)Now they have their puppet government in place, and their eyes are now set to invade Iran.
The worst part is, the mother fuckers haven't even changed their rhetoric. I guess just swapping the "Q" with an "N" is easier for them.
I'm expecting Joe Biden to do a press conference with a little vial of "yellow cake uranium" going into Iran soon.
Control-Z
(15,682 posts)"I'm expecting Joe Biden to do a press conference with a little vial of "yellow cake uranium" going into Iran soon. "
Would you elaborate?
theophilus
(3,750 posts)We swept in there and turned their frowns upside down while making life even better for the
greatly blessed American people. Win, win....at the very least. No? (There is some sarcasm hidden in this post. Try to find it.)
cpwm17
(3,829 posts)To allow their (neocons') favorite country in the Middle East to domantate its neighborhood.
Plus many politicians need enemies. Immediately after the Soviet Union failed, the US started its 20 year war against Iraq. They couldn't stand not having the Soviets as an enemy. So they fabricated some stupid incubator baby lie, and off to war we went. All over some local conflict between Iraq and Kuwait.
bikebloke
(5,260 posts)But the war profiteers don't care as long as they're in the gravy.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)T S Justly
(884 posts)bhikkhu
(10,715 posts)...simple question. If you look at the grand "year zero" plan of the neoconservatives (which failed utterly and irredeemably, btw) its fairly clear.
http://www.politicalscience.ualberta.ca/en/InnovativeTeachingandLearning/~/media/University%20of%20Alberta/Faculties/Arts/Departments/Political%20Science/Documents/InnovativeTeachingAndLearning/Luong.ashx for some background on that.
OwnedByFerrets
(9,054 posts)of course, its much more complex.
Cheney wanted Iraq because they had, or were about to Nationalize their oil. We cant have that....might cost the Oil Giants some profits.
Monkeyboy (bush, in case you have forgotten) wanted Iraq to FIX what daddy didnt finish.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)The rest was kabuki.
LiberalAndProud
(12,799 posts)They had an agenda, and with Junior Cheney at the helm and Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz in the engine room, there was nothing to stop them.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf
In particular, we need
to:
ESTABLISH FOUR CORE MISSIONS for U.S. military forces:
defend the American homeland;
fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars;
perform the constabulary duties associated with shaping the security environment in
critical regions;
transform U.S. forces to exploit the revolution in military affairs;
Zorra
(27,670 posts)The entire Iraq debacle is the result of the 1% using the government they stole in 2000 and subsequent control of the military of the US as private world police force to conquer Iraq and make Iraq available for their business interests to steal Iraq's resources, subjugate the Iraqi people and place them fully under their control, profit through the complete privatization of the resources and the factors and means of production in and of Iraq, create a mass market for their goods within Iraq itself, and ultimately make Iraq into a safe strategic environment from which to run business operations and protect their interests in the region. There are various other related reasons as well, all concerns of the 1%.
OCCUPY!
First, a few looks at the Royal Corporate Castle, the US Embassy in Iraq, the HQ fortress that we built and paid for so that wealthy private interests could have a bulletproof base of operations from which to conduct business.
The Mega-Bunker of Baghdad
The new American Embassy in Baghdad will be the largest, least welcoming, and most lavish embassy in the world: a $600 million massively fortified compound with 619 blast-resistant apartments and a food court fit for a shopping mall.
Massive U.S. Embassy In Iraq Will Expand Further As Soldiers Leave 09/16/11
WASHINGTON -- American combat troops in Iraq may be heading to the exits -- or not -- but the U.S. government's enormously expensive intervention there is hardly coming to an end.
snip---
As part of that increase, the State Department will double its complement of security contractors -- fielding a private army of over 5,000 to guard the embassy and other diplomatic outposts and protect personnel as they travel beyond the fortifications, the official said. Another 3,000 armed guards will protect Office of Security Cooperation personnel, who are responsible for sales and training related to an estimated $13 billion in pending U.S. arms sales, including tanks, squadrons of attack helicopters and 36 F-16s.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/16/us-embassy-iraq-state-department-plan_n_965945.html
Dennis Kucinich:
"As I have said for five years, this war is about oil. The Bush Administration desires private control of Iraqi oil, but we have no right to force Iraq to give up their oil. We have no right to set preconditions for Iraq which lead Iraq to giving up control of their oil. The Constitution of Iraq designates that the oil of Iraq is the property of all Iraqi people," Kucinich said.
http://www.alternet.org/world/63036/
Oil Workers Union Confronts Occupation and Privatization
Organising over 23,000 workers in the Iraqs southern oil and gas industries, the General Union of Oil Employees (GUOE) is struggling against both the US/UK occupation and the corporate-led privatisation of Iraqs industry.
Position on Privatisation The privatisation of the oil and industrial sectors is the objective of all in the Iraqi state/government. We will stand firm against this imperialist plan that would hand over Iraqs wealth to international capitalism such that the deprived Iraqi people would not benefit from it...we are taking this path for the sake of Iraqs glory even if it costs us our lives. Iraqis are capable of managing the their companies and their investments by themselves
http://www.internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article870
Iraq to Privatize Electricity
An Iraqi electricity law hasn't been made public.
September 10, 2007 |
Two of Iraq's many needs right now are more electricity and more investment. A law being drafted could satisfy both, paving the way for foreign and domestic private companies to build power plants, a step toward fully privatizing the electricity sector.
"It should be short coming," a senior U.S. official working in Baghdad on Iraq's electricity sector told United Press International on condition of anonymity on the sidelines of an Iraq energy conference.
http://www.alternet.org/world/62128/
Any questions? It's not rocket science.
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)The completion of setting everything in place for
the multi national corporate masters of the world
to control the universe is complete.
THAT is the only reason our troops have been withdrawn.
They are no longer needed there.
And we will continue to foot the bill for the embassy
while our troops return to poverty and neglect.
Biggest heist ever perpetuated on the planet.
BHN
Zorra
(27,670 posts)they stole the United States in the election of 2000.
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)then the purpose was to establish a permanent base there.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)See who enriched himself by our invasion, conquest and occupation, and you'll know why.
ellenfl
(8,660 posts)sad sally
(2,627 posts)it from inauguration day Jan 20, 2009 until December 15, 2011 - so an additional 255 Americans could die for his war? Yes, I said his war. It's okay to blame the previous administration up to a point, but supposedly the Bush/Cheney administration was no longer in power after 1/20/09.
Remember the hearings with antiwar veterans back in May of 2008? How could a campaigning Senator Obama who rightly called this a "dumb" war hear this yet continue it for three additional years?
#####
Nine veterans of the Iraq war told their stories before members of Congress and a packed gallery. One of the veterans had also served in Afghanistan. About 40 veterans were in the audience.
The veterans spoke about extremely lax rules of engagement handed down by commanding officers, which they said virtually guaranteed atrocities would be committed, and which in turn created a violent backlash among Iraqi people and a continued cycle of violence.
Former U.S. Army Capt. Luis Carlos Montalvan served directly under Gen. David Petraeus in 2005 and 2006.
"We have beaten our drum to try to raise the issue of the dereliction of duty committed by a number of generals who have been promoted and promoted again and continue to perpetuate the lies [that] paint a rosy picture of the situation in Iraq," he said.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Reducing from 140,000 to about 40,000 in 19 months (he ran on 16 months).
The rest, he said, would remain in non-combat roles, and exit after training the Iraqis, in a staged withdraw.
You might recall that as a candidate, he said .... "We must be as careful getting out as we were careless getting in".
And then, not only did he say this as a candidate, almost immediately after winning the election his transition team published this statement:
"Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe we must be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in. Immediately upon taking office, Obama will give his Secretary of Defense and military commanders a new mission in Iraq: ending the war. The removal of our troops will be responsible and phased, directed by military commanders on the ground and done in consultation with the Iraqi government. Military experts believe we can safely redeploy combat brigades from Iraq at a pace of 1 to 2 brigades a month -- which would remove all of them in 16 months. That would be the summer of 2010 -- more than 7 years after the war began.
Under the Obama-Biden plan, a residual force will remain in Iraq and in the region to conduct targeted counter-terrorism missions against al Qaeda in Iraq and protect American diplomatic and civilian personnel. They will not build permanent bases in Iraq, but will continue efforts to train and support the Iraqi security forces as long as Iraqi leaders move toward political reconciliation and away from sectarianism."
http://change.gov/agenda/iraq_agenda/
Bottom line ... anyone who acts confused about what Obama's Iraq exit plan was, clearly was not paying attention.
spanone
(135,816 posts)actually, it was because saddam hussein flew his private airplanes into the twin towers and escaped unscathed back
to iraq. we had to go after him or he would buy more planes and fly them over here again...oh, his sons flew some of
the planes too. oh, and he had nuclear weapons that could eliminate the world too.
frebrd
(1,736 posts)and kill Saddam.
kenny blankenship
(15,689 posts)No, but really there were a confluence of multiple actors and multiple reasons - all of them evil and most of them incredibly stupid and reckless. Every single reason given on this page probably played its part, from the macro-causes like the desire to control access to the ME oil patch, all the way to the micro-motives of petty vengeance and vainglory. It wasn't just Bush and Cheney. It wasn't just Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld. If Hitler had been the only one who wanted to conquer the world and to punish perceived, historical enemies of Germany, the Second World War would never have happened. There was an underlying sickness waiting to erupt into an epidemic.
Some elements of the DC establishment smelled MONEY in war spending. Some wanted to eliminate a country on Israel's Enemies List. Some players saw a chance to capture a major petroleum supplying nation, and turn it into a US protectorate, and thus into a "mole" for us inside of OPEC. Some wanted to demonstrate to the world that the US was still the global actor that could kick in your front door, take your stuff, and rape your wife and daughter right in front of you before blowing your brains out - and therefore a New Rome to be obeyed and paid off with tribute. Some wanted to make sure OPEC nations would see what can happen to you if you start taking Euros in payment for your oil instead of US dollars. Some wanted to permanently overturn the entire framework of international law regulating the use of military force, that was established at the end of WWII, which had elevated the UN and international consensus above the fiat of empires and hegemons, paving the way for the end of colonialism and serving as a buffer and referee between vying preeminent powers. Some saw a perfect opportunity to create a war atmosphere in the United States to beat down all dissension in domestic politics and to cast support for the young soldiers at war in Iraq as support for the President's election, and refusal to support the President and his reelection as betrayal of our young warriors laying down their lives for our freedom.
It wasn't just the Shrub that had a hard on for slaughtering Iraqis. War fever gripped almost all of the visible government - and presumably it gripped all of the shadow government which pulls the strings on the puppets you see in the White House and Congress. One whole political party was brought together in joyous unanimity by the prospect of using war fever as a weapon against the other one. The other party, as is its wont, cravenly split between those defensively "taking it off the table" and going along with war on one hand, and those attempt to cash on the other. A courageous minority said NO. Their warnings were ignored and they were smeared as giving aid and comfort to the enemy. But whichever party or branch of government they stood in, most of the factions and actors involved in the rush to war were probably motivated by more than one of the above ideas and goals. Given the power of the American system of government to concentrate pompous idiots and remorseless assholes into one place, to elevate the bad over the good, it is fair to say that never was there a more foolish and more unjustified war that was also so inevitable.
unionworks
(3,574 posts)They say it's above my pay grade.
gateley
(62,683 posts)jwirr
(39,215 posts)mmonk
(52,589 posts)Energy Task Force and read also read Bremer's Orders. You will get the whole picture.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)but with a different ending ... and ending in which we drive straight into Baghdad and take Saddam out in minutes.
The Trifecta of neocon wet dreams ...
Jakes Progress
(11,122 posts)has been a huge recruitment program for terrorists. bushco made the world a much less safe place.
For the idiots who claim we needed to corral Saddam, we could have bought him off for less than a quarter of what we spent. Without the dead bodies.
MichaelMcGuire
(1,684 posts)It wasn't for WMD although it was used to justify the illegal war
Nor was it for Human rights cos for years. Human rights were at there worst when you did nothing, and in fact during Regans time helped Saddam kill Kurds.
Read
War, Aggression and State Crime
A Criminological Analysis of the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq
by Ronald C. Kramer and Raymond J. Michalowski
http://bjc.oxfordjournals.org/content/45/4/446.short
truth2power
(8,219 posts)in dollars.
Saddam was going off the reservation.
Gaddafi likewise.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)i think cheney wanted dough and shrubby wanted to one up his daddy
gulliver
(13,180 posts)They needed to get back their man credentials, so they pushed the biggest war button they thought they could get away with. America wanted someone hit, so Bush and his Republicans substituted Saddam for Bin Laden, the guy they let escape.
Bush's personal psychology played into it too. He reasoned backwards. Since presidents can lead a country into war, then leading a country into war makes someone a president. And Cheney and his pal Rumsfeld calling Bush Mr. President all the time made him feel great. Really, really great.
Rove liked it too, because it gave him something to run on in the 2002 midterms.
The wealthy liked it, because it empowered their friends the Republicans to turn off the alarm switches that kept the economy safe.
newspeak
(4,847 posts)he already got his agenda. Let's face it, we, the american people, get to pay for the PNAC grand greedy thieving scheme; but we do not profit from these wars, the corporations do, the wealthy do, and those on WS. We pay with our live and money and they reap the profits. Until, like the damn vampires they are, they've drained us dry.
SHRED
(28,136 posts)Lot's of money siphoned to war contractors such as Halliburton.
---
Enrique
(27,461 posts)remember that?