"Inside Job"
Feingold on the Iraq Study Group:
I still have to think an important reason for invading Iraq and then letting it deteriorate was the fact that a nasty drawn-out war was the perfect cover-up for 9/11.
It was such a brilliantly evil plan, and it is working to perfection-- if you don't mind lots and lots of dead people, that is. (And when did the architects of the Iraq war ever mind that, anyway?)
But to me, this cover-up strategy seems to be the only way to explain the absolute incoherence of the powers-that-be in promoting and then dealing with the Iraq war.
Note that NO-ONE yet knows why it was exactly that the Bush administration invaded Iraq. There are of course the obvious reasons that were given, but none of them make sense in retrospect (the only one that holds up at all is that the war has benefited military contractors, but I'm not sure even that is a sufficient rationale). So WHY did the Bush administraiton invade Iraq and why did the powers-that-be support it?
The fact is this commission was composed apparently entirely of people who did not have the judgment to oppose this Iraq war in the first place, and did not have the judgment to realize it was not a wise move in the fight against terrorism. So that's who is doing this report. Then I looked at the list of who testified before them. There is virtually no one who opposed the war in the first place. Virtually no one who has been really calling for a different strategy that goes for a global approach to the war on terrorism. So this is really a Washington inside job and it shows not in the description of what's happened - that's fairly accurate - but it shows in the recommendations.
I still have to think an important reason for invading Iraq and then letting it deteriorate was the fact that a nasty drawn-out war was the perfect cover-up for 9/11.
It was such a brilliantly evil plan, and it is working to perfection-- if you don't mind lots and lots of dead people, that is. (And when did the architects of the Iraq war ever mind that, anyway?)
But to me, this cover-up strategy seems to be the only way to explain the absolute incoherence of the powers-that-be in promoting and then dealing with the Iraq war.
Note that NO-ONE yet knows why it was exactly that the Bush administration invaded Iraq. There are of course the obvious reasons that were given, but none of them make sense in retrospect (the only one that holds up at all is that the war has benefited military contractors, but I'm not sure even that is a sufficient rationale). So WHY did the Bush administraiton invade Iraq and why did the powers-that-be support it?
posted by spooked at 1:52 PM
6 Comments:
Hi Spooked,
In "Pretext for War" Bamford talks about Pearle and Wolfowitz and their "Clean Break" strategy, originally written for Israel, that was about having Israel kill Saddam Hussein and attack Syria under false pretenses.
That plan basically got adopted by the Bush administration.
I think you have Bush who has hated Iraq from the beginning, since "They tried to kill my dad!", and you have a bunch of misguided Zionists in his administration advising him to invade Iraq.
I think Iraq is not about covering up 9/11, but rather that 9/11 was about giving us an excuse to invade Iraq and Afghanistan.
Until I learned that the whole 9/11 thing was a scam, I too was pretty eager to show the Arab world we wouldn't tolerate having our cities blown up.
Look back at recent history: the USA encouraged a long, bloody war between Iran and Iraq, and covertly assisted both sides. I'm sorry to say it, but an unstable and undemocratic Middle East is seen as a boon for the USA and Israel. The Iraq conflict is viewed as a magnet for would-be terrorists and jihadis who run over to blow themselves up in that meat-grinder.
In my opinion at least, the big idea behind 9/11 was getting everyone behind a war, and the encroaching police state was probably a secondary goal.
Why launch a big war to cover up a smaller covert operation? I think your small covert operation is what you use to launch your big war.
Fred
i agree with both views; that 9/11 was a pretext for the war on arabs incl. iraq and that the continuing war in iraq serves to distract from focus on 9/11.
9/11 by itself seems to have been many things, one of which was the convenient removal of the money-sink wtc complex.
i don't believe for a moment however that bush' personal feelings about saddam ("tried to kill my dad!") are anything more than another layer in the smokescreen.
i don't believe for a moment however that bush' personal feelings about saddam ("tried to kill my dad!") are anything more than another layer in the smokescreen.
I certainly agree to that.
While I agree that the conventional/traditional view is that 9/11 was a pre-text for a larger, wider war, I'm not sure if that is really the only way to look at it.
But the simple fact is: we don't know the REAL reasons for invading Iraq-- we can only speculate. And engineering 9/11 as a major pretext for invading Iraq never made much sense.
I tend to wonder if 9/11 was more about financial scams and political/centralized control than as a pretext for war.
well, absent some catastrophic pearl-harbor like event.... or whatever pnac said exactly. the war machine has sucked trillions of $$ into itself since 9/11, and iraq seems to have been the easiest country to use to that effect. there are just too many factors, all interconnected, for any one motive to be THE motive, IMO.
what i don't get is the use of depleted uranium - poor iraq and afghan are being turned into poisonous landscapes that will probably never recover - why is that?
any thoughts on THAT sword of truth?
It's about creating "failed states"... territories that can't be ruled by anyone with any power, whether dictatorial or democratic or other, so that criminal cabals can operate more effectively there without oversight, intervention, prevention, prosecution, etc. This way, numerous things can be accomplished... narco-trafficking, human trafficking, advanced development of 'black operatives' through the use of torture, etc. It's also about having forward bases located at the crossroads of oil, gas and opium, and nicely tucked underneath the soft under-bellies of Russia and China, and being in a position to foment more failed states in ever-increasing radii.
Indeed the evidence points to demolitions and an inside job.
Simply go to www.wtc7.net for some crucial evidence and reasoning.
There is a mountain of inside job fingerprints. Let us create a atmosphere for the truth of the matter to get out!
Highest regards to all,
Erick
Post a Comment
<< Home