Baker: Why We Didn't Remove Saddam

rawquip.blogspot.com

Of Flowers, Chocolates, and Broken Hope

For three years, Iraqis have been throwing flowers and candy thanks to a liberation bestowed to them by the imperialistic George Bush, yesterday they decided to purchase the diamond in a pursuit of an unholy matrimony of death and carnage. The grand experiment of democratizing a nation with howitzers and Abrhams has been blown to dust, the ashes of an ancient civilization swirling in the winds of the desert.

Children often play a game of what if, taking objects apart just to see what happens. Caught up in a world of conjecture without regard to consequence and uninhibited by the sagacity of reality, they often destroy valuable items for the sheer fulfillment of their intellectual curiosity. They have no use for adults who preach the value of discernment and wisdom, and tend to blame others once the folly of their actions is revealed.

This administration has operated in much the same manner, playing a juvenile game of machismo--taunting whenever possible, dismissive in nature, and name calling at all times. The Middle East has been set afire by a pharisaic administration whose assurance in their moral righteousness was surpassed only by their disdain for alternative views. The awful reality is that there is no answer to the Iraq disaster, the Pandora 's Box was opened by a neoconinc key, there is no way to close the lid back.

The sound bites of victory in Iraq, staying the course, stand up stand down, and the sheer depravity of waiting for the "recommendation" from the Iraq survey group is just a marketing strategy to blur the reality of failure. The circle has been drawn in the desert, the Shia and the Sunnis will slaughter each other until there is a clear loser. Funded by outside emissaries, they will be used as pawns to fight a geopolitical war. There will not be a clear victor, Iraq will become the next Lebanon, on a mind-blowing scale. In the end, Bush will transform the Middle East as he envisioned, much the same way a child transforms a vase while tossing it carelessly in the air. At least the flowers were saved, now if we only had chocolates.

http://rawquip.blogspot.com

"Ha" "ha" "HA!"

Like hell. The reason they didn't "liberate" Iraq was that Saddam was exactly what they wanted there. The US has been scared shitless of Iran and didn't mind the bloodletting that Iraq and Iran practiced on one another over a decade.

Bush Senior even gave Saddam tacit permission to do as he pleased with Kuwait until the Saudis freaked out. Then it was overdrive to accomodate the Saudi royals. The minute Desert Storm had done the deed the King pulled the plug and George the 1st heroically stopped the liberation.

Yet, the administration encouraged the average Iraqi to revolt with the wink and a nod that help would be coming. In reality it looked the other way when Saddam unleashed his forces to crucify the ill-prepared uprising. The "no-fly" zone was a lame attempt to make up for turning Iraq into its own killing fields.

James Baker: America hating, al queda loving Democrat, if you read the article.

Iraq's continued violation of UN resolutions and its expulsion of weapons inspectors in 1998 prompted the Clinton Administration to adopt regime change in Iraq as US policy -- a policy President George W Bush also followed.

How incredibly sad that such crap still works on the faithful. "It's Clinton that got us into this trap and now we're trying to get us out."

You heard it first from Mr. Baker folks.

clinton was a smarter president with a smarter cabinet..
clinton may have had the same intel that bush got when he came into power, reports say that bush was thinking about going into Iraq from day one of his admin.

but clinton knew his geopolitics better and was able to correctly evaluate risks and rewards..

Bush #I's War in Kuwait/Iraq had a number of objectives that could not be articulated, but which opened up a lot of opportunities. Getting mired into a regoional war, or being seen as a Western invader in the Middle East would have been counterproductive.

1st, Kuwait made the use of military force an acceptable option and elevated the prestige of US military service. Considering the gloom of the Vietnam experience that hung over the national psyche, this was a priority mission.

2nd, the prestige of the USA was elevated in the Middle East. No longer was Irael the sole evil-doer in Middle Eastern eyes, but the Nazi-era dictators of the Middle East were marginalized. A door was left open to exploit this opportunity, but it was never followed up on with a coherent diplomatic plan. (A partial success but judges a missed opportunity because of the rise of the vulcans who opposed diplomatic bridge building over seeking military hegemony.)

3rd, Iraq had at the time the 5th largest military in the world. Kuwait saw that military smashed, and took the pressure off Israel, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran. It cooled down the rhetoric for half a generation and Dayton and Oslo were made possible (for what these peace overtures were worth).

4th, the alliance between the US and guld nations including Saudi Arabi was strengthened. Economically this led to lower oil prices (and a period of calm before the storm). But the unintended consequence of US bases in Arabia was that the US presence emboldened Wahabi extremists like UBL; This threat was only picked up on by people who tracked UBL -- folks like Richard Clarke and John O'Niell. (Unfortunately, the deaf, dumb and blind PNAC neocons missed this development entirely.)

The idea that Baker is regarded today as a problem solver in the middle east is so ridiculous. As part of the cabal from the Reagan days he has engineered criminal incursions into foreign nations and assisted in torture, murder, kidnapping. If we ever want to regain America's reputation as a real lover of freedom we will have to finally get rid of all remnants of the right wing criminals who have committed so many crimes in America's name. Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton nearly managed to get real peace in the middle east but their efforts went down the drain when the right wing lunatics regained power. If you don't despise these criminals then you haven't bothered to learn about the things they have done to people of other countries in your name.

Don't forget Baker's role in the post-2000 election shenanigans either.

"It's Clinton that got us into this trap and now we're trying to get us out."

That's a pretty weird thing to say.

DOGMAN

mr cairo..."Bush Senior even gave Saddam tacit permission to do as he pleased with Kuwait " any supportive reading for this statement? i agree with you...we did leave the rebels hanging out there without support...bad as what kennedy did with the bay of pigs...doesn't colin powell take alot of credit for stopping desert storm because of the slaughter of the royal guard along the "highway of death"

CAIRO..."How incredibly sad that such crap still works on the faithful. "It's Clinton that got us into this trap and now we're trying to get us out."

????how do you extrapolate this conclusion from his statement of historical fact?where is he placing blame on clinton?where is he even inferring that clinton is at fault for W going to war?

""bad as what kennedy did with the bay of pigs...""

Popular opinion only impaired by the simplistic understanding of what really happened. But don't bother to ever really read and find out since it is more fun for right wing loonies to perpetuate the myths about Kennedy and the Bay of Pigs incident. Hey, what's wrong with a little nukular war anyway???
Viva Batista!!!! The Right wing loonies favorite gangster president.

"Iraq had at the time the 5th largest military in the world."

Yeah, maybe, but after the first 3 largest armies, there's a REAL big fucking drop-off. The Hare Krishnas are the
6th largest army in the world, and they've already got all our airports.

""let's end this crap of whose to blame""

Bull shit. We should never forget who is to blame and we should demand justice for them. They have been doing this stuff since Reagan's presidency and it is time to finally clean house and get rid of every remnant of the criminal cabal who infiltrated government during Reagan's presidency.

Going back to Bush the businessman, his big break came when the Emir of Kuwait gave his company the contract for off shore facilities. Baker was in the mix back then as well.

After Saddam invaded Kuwait there was a public relations effort to gain support for the war. Remember the "babies in incubators" story?

So Bush came to the aid of his old friend and benefactor. He was smart about it and formed a coalition. But allowing Saddam to vent his rage on the Shites and Kurds was a poor decision, and it set the stage for the mess we're in today.

www.commondreams.org

www.historyofcuba.com DANNI

"lying us into war, torturing prisoners, rewarding cronies with no-bid contracts, spying secretly on the nation's citizens, selling public policy to Jack Abramoff's clients, stating even their intent to ignore laws with dozens of "signing statements" good grief .TONY do you really swallow mthis hook line and sinker?

Kerrin they are not Myths they are the Facts of the Matter something You Righty Tighties seem to hate so much.

Larry

here we go shoulda coulda and woulda-i always thought it was a mistake to leave sadaam in power after the gulf war -but we need to deal with what we got now -forget the blame if bush stood up and said "look i'm as stupid as you say i am and don't deserve to be president "what would that do to get us out of this mess -let's end this crap of whose to blame -and resolve the situation we are in
jasman

Posted by newjasman at 2006-12-04 09:47 AM

To correct and not repeat a mistake one must first openly recognize and admit to it. We have yet to truly do that and until we do we will remain stuck. I know how bad w supporters want us to just forget how we got here but it is not only disingenuous but also counter productive.

Bull shit. We should never forget who is to blame and we should demand justice for them. They have been doing this stuff since Reagan's presidency and it is time to finally clean house and get rid of every remnant of the criminal cabal who infiltrated government during Reagan's presidency.

Posted by danni at 2006-12-04 10:44 AM

You Go!

We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."

Albert Einstein

Sorry bout the tripple post...don't know what happened.

good grief .TONY do you really swallow mthis hook line and sinker?

The facts of the matter, yes. The hyperbole of what you quoted isn't needed when the actual truth is much more damning in its reality. How else do you see the progression of events?

LAR..didn't mean "mthis"...don't know how that freakin' m jumped in there ...i meant to ask if tony believed it hook line and sinker. i find most articles full of insult,exageration and inuendo fitted around a few facts and talking to unnamed officials/insiders.left?right? doesn't matter...just making the point that one has to look beyond what supports their personal position...so many here like to throw out koolaide,indoctrination etc...when it seems there are so many closed minds here

Oh Kerrin suffers from LarryMohr syndrome on Typing ehhhhhhhh sucks doesn't it.

Larry

danni
so people on the right keep on blamin clinton-and lefties beat up on bush -and no one gives any thought to the people at risk (us troops and iraqi civilians) let them keep on dyin as long as we get the blame placed -is that what you sayin-
a hundred years from now we can still be talkin bout blame -but right now we should be thinkin bout endin this shit-and if as much energy was spent on a conclusion as placin blame we would have ended it by now
jasman
jasman

Kerrin...

If you want further elucidation, check here: www.drudge.com

I don't think you've read nor taken in all the information of the article, and just how it, and not a War on Terror drove our war effort, even when the Administration has consistently said the opposite, while leaving a trail showing just what the actual truth has been regardless of the spin.

LAR...look at danni's knee jerk reaction to my bay of pigs comment. i should have filled it out more as she is ill informed and venomous in her thinking.bush implied support for the iraqi when he called off desert storm the same as kennedy implied support for the insurgents at the bay of pig but did not follow thru...both leaving people to die.danni also assumes i'm anti jfk...i'm not...i admired the man.

but right now we should be thinkin bout endin this shit-and if as much energy was spent on a conclusion as placin blame we would have ended it by now
jasman

Without an understanding of the mistakes made starting it how can we begin to think we can end it in any "better that what we have been doing so far" way?

drpike
by now if you don't know what mistakes were made you'll never know -plus you can't unmake them-if you ended up in the middle of a deep lake without a lifepersever how much time would you expend tryin to figure out how you got there
jasman

newjasman

I know what mistakes I think were made but the ONLY person with the power to change things still recognises (or admits) to many if any of them. Until I get something from "the decider" that makes me believe he has begun to take a reasonable view of what went wrong I cannot believe he can giude us out.

Your analogy would hold if the situation only involved me and a lake, but this is, to a greater or lesser extent, the world and at least every Iraqi and American in a far more comlex than sink or swim situation. If it's that easy, tell me, what do you propose as the solution?

newjasman,

Perhaps this will make my position a little cleared. Instead of your lake analogy lets use space. We have the sun in front of us and it's getting hot, bad idea, but unless we know how we arrived here, our original goal destination and our course and speed, we cannot correct.

That should have been clearer...bad place to make a spelling mistake ;-)

An honest and somber assessment:

The "Lebanonisation" of Iraq through a
descent into sectarian fragmentation and violence, or an Iraq that erupts into full-blown civil war, or an Iraq with a government hostile to America -- each would be an extraordinarily undesirable result for the United States, the region, and the world.

Unfortunately, the jury also remains out on whether these outcomes can be avoided.

>

drpike
so we argue continue on same course and burn up-no we need to set a course that avoids the danger -name one positive step that has been put forth in last 2 years that has been acted on
jasman

jasman,

I agreee whole hartedly...question is, do what? What is better? Do you have any ideas?

I have been opposed to this war from day one, and by that I mean when w fisrt uttered the word "Iraq", but, now that we are there, I have no solution without a goal.

Any ideas?

""i should have filled it out more as she is ill informed and venomous in her thinking.""

650,000 dead Iraqis and I'm venomous????
3000 dead American soldiers and I am venomous???
Any comparison between the unfortunate situation at the Bay of pigs and the major disaster in Iraq is ridiculous.
Blame must be assigned where it is deserved to set an example that wars begun for dubious reasons by people with agendas that are not known will be punished. It will also send a message to the rest of the world that America does not condone the catastrophe caused by Bush and the Neocon cabal any more than does the rest of the world.
Arresting and punishing George W. Bush would do more good than probably any plan proposed by Baker or anyone else.

www.commondreams.org

The smoking gun for Bushco's criminality.

Personally, accepting that I don't think we should have been there in the first place, I think honor dictates that we at least do what we can to help them sort it out for themselves. I tacitly support a plan of re-deployment to defensable positions and allow the Iraqis to sort this mess out as I believe they must. For honor's sake I endorse doing all we can to keep outside factions outside until they are "stable" (defined as self governed whatever that means to them and at least no more violent than America) and to assist financially and politically any factions showing progress toward that stability with a minimum of human suffereing. But, in the end, they will reach their own equalibrium so we should no be inside mucking about. What was it the Vietnamese leader said at the end of "We Were Soldiers"? "The Americans think they have one a great victory here but the outcome will be the same. The only thing that has changed is the number of those who will die before we get there". Something like that.

Danni,

These guys think we should see Iraq like "I just ran over a dozen people at a bus stop but don't worry about that, lets just move on...here, I'll move my car.

my solution would not be pleasant i would with draw troops from built up areas and have them basically fort up -any attacks on my people would result in the village or town they(the attackers) came from destroyed -villagers from destroyed villages moved into containment areas -let kill each other as much as they want -i wouldn't take sides-if that don't settle them down i would destroy the infastructure and leave with the understandin -i will bomb the shit out of any suspect terrorist camps that spring up-by now we should know we ain't winnin no hearts and minds
jasman
jasman

Doesn't that sound just a little too much like the behavior we justified invading Iraq to oust Saddam for perpetuating? I mean other than those pesky WMD?

I agree with you by the way except I think we should withdraw from Iraq entirely.

Well, ok, I don't agree with that "bomb the shit out of them stuff" but if we were not there that would not come up.

goals
our original goal is accomplished sadaam is gone -the remainin goals should be iraqis -they at this point are the only ones who can curtail the violence(which is mostly directed at each other)-lest we forget the enemies of the us who are not iraqis would have all iraqis dead if it made america look weak -the iraqis have become pawns in a bigger game
jasman

The Fifth Division shows the extraordinary difficulty of constructing an allegedly national army in the middle of a sectarian civil war. They are actually being trained by the U.S. and proceed to fight Sunnis. And, according to this article, they stand

accused of arresting hundreds of Sunni men on little or no evidence, threatening to rape a suspect's wife to coerce a confession, and intimidating its commander's critics, according to interviews with Iraqi and U.S. officials.

Currently, the U.S. military is in control and doing what it can to monitor and restrain sectarian abuses. But what happens when command is transferred? Money quote:

"I understand there were operations done previously by General Shakir, before I got here," that angered the Sunni population, Sutherland said. He added that U.S. forces have helped the general introduce better training for 5th Division troops, conduct intelligence-driven operations and start a recruiting program to enlist more Sunni troops.

The 5th Division "is not necessarily representative of the population of Baquba, but it is something General Shakir is working on," Sutherland said. Diyala's police and military were in such disarray earlier this year that the previous U.S. command delayed plans to transfer full control to the Iraqi military in October. The new handover date is just months away.

"Right now, the Iraqi Army is expected to transfer to Iraqi ground force command in early February," Sutherland said. "There's nothing I've seen to indicate that won't happen."
time.blogs.com

drpike
i know we won't act in such a manner but if we think we can pacify this country we are foolin ourselves there are too many different agendas among iraqis them seleves and then you add syria iran and al queda -all of this is beyond our control
jasman

yes DANNI....again you chose to read a post thru your hate filled haze." Any comparison between the unfortunate situation at the Bay of pigs and the major disaster in Iraq is ridiculous."...READ ...." cairo...i agree with you...we did leave the rebels hanging out there without support...bad as what kennedy did with the bay of pigs."...then take the bother to read the cuba link before spewing your tripe at me!

JAS..."i will bomb the shit out of any suspect terrorist camps " that would be a plan but these murderous cowardly bastards set up in schools and hospitals. when they get bombed they hide their guns and drag the dead women and children out to be a photo op...

JAS...i was thinking along the lines of pulling our guys into a perimeter and arming the guys we like to the hilt. then deal with the ones left standing.

our original goal is accomplished sadaam is gone
Posted by newjasman at 2006-12-04 01:20 PM

Saddam was worth 3000 Americans, hubreds of thousands of Iraqis, hundreds of billions of US $, and leaving Iraq yet another fundamentalist Muslim country in the ME?

arming the guys we like to the hilt

Just which "ones" do we like? The ones loyal to Iran, or the ones loyal to Saudi Arabia and Syria who also are in bed with AQ, or the ones loyal to their own drive for independence from the Turks?

Please tell us so we can make a decision!

Tonyroma,

Tony, Tony, Tony, your making this far too complicated. Remember, your either with us or aginst us, we like the ones who like us. Oh yea, none of them like us.

Never mind.

As Fareed Zakaria pointed out in his last column in Newsweek, there were two consecutive days in Baghdad recently where we protected the Mahdi Army one day and fought them the next. We are alternately protecting and fighting the Shiites and the Sunnis. We are clearly caught in the middle of a chaotic civil war. It is impossible to "win" in this situation.

Furthermore, training the Iraqi army is a complete waste of time. Everyone on the ground knows that they are not going to stay together and magically enforce a democracy in Iraq after we leave. All we're doing is training one or more sides in an internal fight. In a best case scenario, we're wasting our time. In a worst case scenario, we are training people to kill each other better.

And as I have pointed out before, if you think we won't have to one day fight the Iraqi army we are now training, you haven't paid any attention to our history in the Middle East. Simple logic dictates that in a country where an overwhelming majority of people believe it is appropriate to attack our troops, the army of that country will naturally be hostile to us one day. And our big plan is to make sure that army is trained before we leave? That's an awful plan.

The situation in Iraq has devolved so much that Muqtada al-Sadr taking over has gone from a worst case scenario to a best case scenario. Before we were rooting for Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani to serve as a moderating influence (re-read that sentence to understand how ridiculous our original plan was). We were concerned that Sadr would stir up the masses and seize power in the streets. Now, the situation is so out of hand and Sadr's minions so out of control that we are hoping that Sadr can corral them and avoid blood-drenched anarchy in the streets.
www.huffingtonpost.com

Dr. Pike...

Obviously, I'm with you 100%. The reason we can't find an answer for Iraq lies with the fact our rationale for being there was corrupt from the beginning! All the excuses and rationales don't hold up to the facts already in evidence of exactly why we invaded both Afghanistan and Iraq, while installing ex-oil company lackeys in both countrys into key government positions.

Until we understand the deception behind our involvement we can't discuss the future in the terms it needs to be instead of the pie-in-the-sky disconnect of not realizing just how fractured Iraq society is, especially now that the war has driven over a million Iraqis into other countries, and many of this million were the foundation for the democracy we said we'd like to build.

The people left aren't as educated, nor are they as secular as the ones already gone. The opportunity for Iraq, however slim it always was, is gone, just like the 5 tons of C4 thats gone missing from the Iraqi Defense Ministry. www.drudge.com The options are a choice of picking bad or worse.

Not that it matters but I'm not a doctor, DR are my initials. Just don't want to misrepresent any view I may offer.

awww tony you need a quirkier sense sense of humor. by the way i almost got all the way thru the article ...and stand by my position. one can compile a boatload of selective facts,statements out of context and inuendo to make a point.the article is a case in point.i see it in pro war articles also.tough to sort out.

The decisions should be based on the number of American lives that will be saved. Whenever we finally pull out of Iraq they will still be dealing with the same problems, delaying it will not save one Iraqi but will cost many Americans their lives and limbs.

DANNI....
the bay of pigs was planned by by ike to include a carrier task force for air support-kennedy cancelled the task force -they were susposed to get gun support from navy -so the cuban reblels hit the beach dependin on support that wasn't there -it has never been stated exactly why and when kennedy withdrew the support or why the cuban rebels went on with out it-the idea might not have been kennedies but the execution of this plan feel to him so part of the blame has to be his
jasman

drpike
what were cost a casualities at time sadaam fell -the continiuin casualities have very little to do with original goals -what has happened is those goals did not satisfy the conditions in iraq
jasman

Kerrin...

Then what do you consider evidence? The article only puts into a whole context what I've read from numerous other sources that only address each separate point. The work from Cheny's energy commission doesn't lie, nor do the recorded statements of US officials toward the Taliban before we invaded Afghanistan.

I truly wonder what some people consider actionable information and not innuendo, especially when most every single person is joined by only one common denominator: ties to the oil industry and American oil interests!

kerrin57
i think i said somethin simalar to that bout a month ago but lets face it the american people would not want to stand by and see two or three factions fueled by ethnic and religous fever slaughter each other -but then again when i look at darfur maybe they would
jasman

newjasman,

I don't know but IMHO still way too high, especially considering the predictable and predicted lateral effects. Are you suggesting that as soon as Saddam was apprehended we should have split? Do you think Iraq or the world at large would be better off now? Would anyone except perhaps the Iraqi's Saddam would have oppressed, well made up for by those oppressed in his absence?

JASMAN
for more info on Bay of Bigs go to JFK presidential library site where they give a pretty good explanation of what happened. It was a terrible event and JFK is partially responsible. The thing was the fear of war with the Soviets which doomed the raid.
Excusing the people who planned and sold this war using manipulated intel will only fuel the hatred for the US. If the Iraqis saw that we did not excuse them and actually put them on trial as Saddam was they might begin believing that the US is not a criminal state intent on stealing their oil.

That is true as to whether or not Iraq will want to become a viable country on its own again with 'democratic' type elections. It will never be a "Jeffersonian Democracy" in the way of the United States as some people think that it has to be. But if it shows up like a Germany, Japan, Greece, Brazil, or something like that isn't that better than a dictatorship or oligarchy! There was never anything done to the infrastructure to the country to better it prior to 2002. There were plenty of oil reveneue steams coming in to do something. All that we saw post war were the palaces and elitist homes! And this was the 5th largest Army in the World in 1990 or whatever. Where did that money come to arm that?

Nothing was done to stop the terrorist since the 80's. They took captive the embassy in Iran, bombed our people in Lebanon, Berlin, the Med, Italy and other places in Europe and the Middle East. I know that this did not come from Iraq. But when 9/11 happened, a new doctrine of fighting back finally occurred. Our soldiers, airmen, marines were now allowed to fight back instead of being sitting ducks. The might was turned on the largest military power in the area to eliminate that threat (which it did) and set up a place to stage from to eliminate other terrorist threats in the area to include nation states that sponsor terrorism.

So a major mistake happened in determining how fast the Iraqis ran away from the initial engagement and blended in with their weapons intact. Then other people didn't get into place in time to prevent the looting. Once in place things settled down a bit and the hunt was on for WMD that was already out of the country.... yes I believe that still to this day.

But now our troops are engaging terrorists for the most part in a foreign country, not the USA, with resources that would not be available here to the them. Would the FBI be able to tackle the problems effectively? I doubt that. Would local law enforcement? I doubt that also

Despite the lame obstrcutions by Sadam of the inspectors last days they were proving that there were no WMD...they had to leave to get out of the way of w's incasion. Now we have chaos. No matter how you select factoids (or wishes) this thing is a disaster and w is one step away from talking to the portraits.

drpike
probably wouldn't been much worse and we wouldn't been in middle-and we were goin to take the blame for what insued any way
jasman

Jasman, Sorry but I truely do not understand your point. Would you mind restating it for me?

TONY...cheney task force report was 13,500 pages...covered oil producing countries from canada to venezuela. yet the article leaves one with the feeling that they spent all their time conspiring over way to get their paws on afghan and iraq....subtle..but the article is full of them...like the jfk assasination,9/11,ufo's...i just say beware...be a skeptic.i know hating the death of our soldiers and the civilians makes it emotionally charged...hard to be totally objective.

oh and how about the one where we really didn't land on the moon?

Where's BlueSkies when you need him/her?

drpike
if we would have left say a month after invasion would it be any worse than it is today or after the capture of sadamm -remember the first election-all these times were times we could have left leavin the impression we had done what we wanted -but let's face we are at the point now any leavin will be seen as a loss -the results of which will be a more agressive radical islam in middle east and true chaos in iraq(no matter what people think this is jus semi-chaos)
jasman

A position paper prepared by the office of the later-Vice President Cheney states that the Kazakhstan oil reserves would be "more than sufficient to supply US needs for at least a decade" and would further "reduce American dependence on OPEC."

Unocal Oil Company signed an agreement with the reigning Taliban forces as well as their opponents, the Northern Alliance, in order to permit an oil pipeline to be built through Afghanistan direct through Pakistan to the Indian Ocean. by this, the exorbitant rates charged by the Russian to use their pipelines would be avoided. Unocal then opened official offices in Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan to facilitate the construction of this oil pipeline.

In December of 1997, official Taliban representatives were in the United States to attend a conference at Unocal headquarters in Texas to discuss the Afghanistan pipeline. These talks failed because the Taliban made what Unocal felt were excessive financial demands.

In 1998, internal strife in Afghanistan and inherent instability in Pakistan reached such levels as to render the pipeline project impossible to execute. In the same year, the Houston, Texas based firm of Enron suggested instead to build a $3 billion oil pipeline parallel to the Russian pipelines, running westwards rather than taking the shorter but more problematic route south.

In a secret memorandum by Cheney, it is stated that the Unocal company was prepared to finance the southern route. According to this, this project would take five years to complete and its annual revenues from the successful completion of this pipeline would approximate $2 billions. however, and this had been the subject of a number of secret American reports, the only thing standing in the way of the construction of the pipeline was the basic opposition of the Afghanistan government and its political supporters.

On May 8, 2001, the US Department of State, in the name of Secretary of State Powell, gave 43 million US Dollars to the Taliban in order to facilitate their cooperation in the pipeline project.

On June 10, 2001, the BND warned the CIA office in the US Embassy to the Federal Republic [of Germany] that certain Arab terrorists were planning to seize American commercial aircraft for use as weapons of destruction against significant American symbols. This was considered a general warning only. The Federal Republic's warning of August 6, however, was specific as to date, time and places of the attacks.

On July 11, 2001, in Berlin, US officials: Thomas Simmons, a former American Ambassador to Pakistan, Lee Coldren, State Department expert on Asian matters, and Karl Inderfurth, Assistant Secretary of State for Asian matter met with Russian and Pakistani intelligence officers. At this meeting, which was under surveillance, it was stated by the Americans that the United States planned to launch military strikes against Afghanistan in October of that year. The purpose of these strikes was to topple the Afghanistan government and the Taliban in order to replace it with a government "more sensitive to the needs of American oil interests."

In mid-August 2001, President of the Russian Federation Putin ordered that the American authorities be warned of pending attacks on government buildings inside the United States. This warning was conveyed to the US Ambassador in Moscow and via the Russian Ambassadors office directly to the US President.

On August 20, the Government of France, through the American Embassy in Paris and their Embassy in Washington, issued a more specific warning. This warning specified the exact date, time and places of the attacks.

tbrnews.org

Kerrin...

As I've said before, this information exists from many varied sources, not just from one person with an axe to grind. This came from the German Secret Service, but of course, its been neither admitted to nor denied, as are many secretive documents that see the light of day.

I am being objective, what I've not being is naive. The PNAC stated explicitly what the objective was before OBL and AQ were even on the map regarding any military adventures in the region. If you can't see this as factual, then it is you not being truthful to your instincts and to the ackowledged-verified history of the players involved.

Remember how "war for oil" was riduculed as the territory of the nutcase Left?

www.washingtonpost.com

JAS...you'll get a rrrreal good take on the bay of pigs from jfk site and then go to the clinton site for a tutorial on futures trading.sheeesh...

""JAS...you'll get a rrrreal good take on the bay of pigs from jfk site and then go to the clinton site for a tutorial on futures trading.sheeesh...""

Kerrin, are you actually old enough to remember the Bay of Pigs???

no honey,just old enough to read

I remember, you cant read the tension that existed in the world based on the nukes of the US and USSR...remember tuck and cover Danni?

BOYD..."Now, more than 3 1/2 years later, someone else is asserting that the war is about oil -- President Bush." spin! by the way the likelyhood of conflict among the factions of islam in various countries could truly result if the us abandons iraq....very much endangering the world supply of oil and oil prices.would reverberate in the world economy

by the way the likelyhood of conflict among the factions of islam in various countries could truly result if the us abandons iraq....very much endangering the world supply of oil and oil prices.would reverberate in the world economy

LOL

Who Could Have Ever Imagined........

Kerrin-
Duh.

My point was that this obvious motive was ridiculed as unhinged and crazy in the marketing phase of the war (it was about WMD and self-defence, as you may recall)

Who Could Have Ever Imagined........

I could only imagine....

How is it Clintons fault again? Someone want to explain that one? Before you do though, remember, Rummy, Powell and Cunnilingus Rice all are on Video stating that Iraq has no WMD's, that he is cutoff from the rest of the world and poses NO threat at all...but this is somehow Clintons fault?

Laughable at best. This kind of 'blame game' being played by the right is one of main reason that they lost BOTH houses. Keep up the game folks. It's working great for me so far.

Posted by COMMONSENSE at 2006-12-04 06:08 PM | Reply

www.thememoryhole.org

Colin Powell
We had a good discussion, the Foreign Minister and I and the President and I, had a good discussion about the nature of the sanctions -- the fact that the sanctions exist -- not for the purpose of hurting the Iraqi people, but for the purpose of keeping in check Saddam Hussein's ambitions toward developing weapons of mass destruction. We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they are directed toward that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was ten years ago when we began it. And frankly they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the neighbors of Iraq...

Condi Rice
But in terms of Saddam Hussein being there, let's remember that his country is divided, in effect. He does not control the northern part of his country. We are able to keep arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt.

www.whitehouse.gov
Dick Cheney
VICE PRES. CHENEY: There is--in the past, there have been some activities related to terrorism by Saddam Hussein. But at this stage, you know, the focus is over here on al-Qaida and the most recent events in New York. Saddam Hussein's bottled up, at this point, but clearly, we continue to have a fairly tough policy where the Iraqis are concerned.

Larry