For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one reason everyone could agree on.
Paul Wolfowitz
Vanity Fair interview
For a (fully-sourced) timeline of all those WMD assertions, click here. In the words of Emile Zola, J'accuse! The Bush Administration is guilty of lying to the American public repeatedly, unnecessarily killing thousands of Iraqis, equally unnecessarily killing upwards of 200 American and around 40 British soldiers, airmen and marines, and for what? Liberation? Not hardly; that could have been done in 1991. The enrichment of American oil contractors? I'd like to think not, but... so why? Dreams of American imperialism, as stated in the Project for a New American Century documents? Could be.
Posted by Linkmeister at May 29, 2003 09:26 PMThat post Billmon did is fantastic, isn't it?
Posted by: The Other Scott at May 30, 2003 02:24 AMThat post Billmon did is fantastic, isn't it?
Posted by: The Other Scott at May 30, 2003 02:24 AMThe whole story, along with all the other LIES, that the media refuses to report, are all at http://www.tvnewslies.org It's all there. Go for it.
Posted by: Reggie at May 30, 2003 12:25 PM1) "We settled on" does not mean "we invented." It means "the American public has the attention span of a gnat, and if we endlessly repeat the many, many good reasons for offing Saddam in an lengthy list, their eyes will glaze over." This may be condescending (though I'm not sure it's inaccurate) but it's hardly a war crime. FDR justified the completely illegal (under international law) Lend-Lease program on the basis of "a neighbor's house being on fire" because if he said "The fascists will be coming for us soon enough" the German-American Bund would have marched on Washington chanting "Heil Hitler."
2) If Bush wanted to enrich American oil companies in Iraq, he could have done it at considerably less cost to the Treasury by striking a deal with the French and Russians when he took office to lift the sanctions "for humanitarian reasons" in return for a hefty share of the new oil deals. War is the least efficient, most effective means of aquiring resources, and the US has had better means available for years, if it chose to use them.
Peace,
Brian
ooooops. that last sentence should read, "most expensive, LEAST effective means." Shows what happens when you try to blog while your son watches SpongeBob.
Posted by: JB the Kairos Guy at May 31, 2003 04:41 AMI'm not one of those who thinks oil was the goal, Brian. I am one of those who believes that Bush has bought in to the PNAC ideology that America should rule the world by dint of its military power.
Posted by: Linkmeister at May 31, 2003 09:14 AM