Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Friday, March 15, 2013 | 2:01 a.m.
Another view?
View more of the Las Vegas Sun's opinion section:
• Editorials - the Sun's viewpoint.
• Columnists - local and syndicated writers.
• Letters to the editor - readers' views.
Have your own opinion? Write a letter to the editor.
Maureen Dowd’s comments in her column “Repent, Dick Cheney” are overdue — though too easy, not only on the former vice president but also on former President George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld.
The mentioned “gentlemen,” who in their youth diligently avoided combat in Vietnam but urged thousands of others to fight and, if necessary, die for the biggest scam ever, meticulously planned and brought to fruition the second Iraq war.
The U.S. “won” but accomplished nothing but death and the maiming of Americans and Iraqis whose numbers are incalculable.
A congressional medal of horror ought to be bestowed on that triumvirate of chicken hawks.
It is commendable that Dick Cheney has no regrets. Neither did Saddam Hussein.
As the Democrats continue to fail America
They resort to the campaign tacit of demeaning the opposition and bringing up Bush at every turn
Ze must move on. Ze must clean up his own house before throwing stones.
Ze should be concerned about al-Qaeda in North Africa.
Obama says al-Qaeda and it affiliates are on the run - JUST NOT in Syria, Libya, Egypt, Afghanistan, Iraq, Mali, Yemen, Sudan, Algeria, Amazingly nobody is on the kill list that was involved in the Benghazi attack because al-Qaeda is on the run.
Obama has a secret capture-or-kill list where Obama is the prosecutor, the defense attorney, the judge, the jury and the executioner. Hummm - except that nobody is captured.
Over 3000 people including collateral damage women and children were killed by Obama to get these high value targets. Only two were captured. In four years only one terrorist was brought in for interrogation. As we know a high value target is a zero value target when dead.
There were many mistakes made during the Iraq war and the war itself looks like a mistake in hindsight. Only Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld and Colin Powell 'know' whether they really believed Iraq was a big enough threat to go to war or we went to war for another reason. We may never really know the answer.
I have no problem with the letter writer, Dowd, or anyone who 'believes' that these men knew Saddam had no WMD's and posed no real threat because they may be correct. However, they may also be wrong and these men may have 'believed' what they told us in the run up to war.
At any rate, there were multiple mistakes made during the war and these men are accountable for those mistakes.
Michael
wtplv - "Only Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld and Colin Powell 'know' whether they really believed Iraq was a big enough threat to go to war or we went to war for another reason."
I completely disagree. They knew intel was based on BS which is why Colin Powell quit after learning he was duped by the Bush leadership. Bush the Lesser wanted to be a war time president as was his daddy and he fudged, lied, misinformed, or what ever it took to get us into war. If you play back those videos you can see how the excuses changed from day to day. Outing Valerie Plame was one of the tools they used in trying to discredit her husband who refused to lie for the Bush administration over "yellow cake" not found to be shipped to Iraq and aluminum tubing supposedly used in centrifuges.
The Iraqi War has cost $2 trillion and climbing with the care of injured vets. Killing hundreds of thousands of none combat innocent civilians is no way to establish diplomacy.
On the financial side, you can't cut taxes for the wealthiest people in the country and then engage in wars that cost billions of dollars a week to maintain. The only people to gain are the investors in companies such as Halliburton and KBR.
In War is a Racket, Smedley Butler wrote, "I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents." General Butler wrote that in 1935 and much hasn't changed since; but for technology.
Good letter Ze-ev Amzalem, thanks.
Somebody look for Future's gravity boots, I think he lost them again.
Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, and the lot of terrorists responsible for 9-11 are dead. Thank you George, Dick and Don and our military heroes. And President Obama too for continuing what his predecessor started.
Carmine D
In reply to Ze-ev Amzalem; your letter to the editor peaked my interest and took me to do some searching of related issues on the Internet
I was surprised when I discovered an article where the media has reported there is a now a huge sized derestricted U.S. Department Inspector General's Report that was comprised of FBI investigations that opened a "War Crimes" file on former President Bush, former Vice-President Dick Cheney, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. Further, it is alleged that FBI agents penned, that they had witnessed acts of torture at the Guantanamo Bay prison camp but were ordered to stop writing by the Bush administration.
This would be truly characteristic of the Bush administration and their licenses of impunity from within their halls of power. No doubt these same torture allegations seemingly continue on to this day and just won't go away. Keep up the good work Ze-ev Amzalem.
PS: One oould surely bet former Vice-President Dick Cheney would have had regrets if he had been brought to trial and fairly judged on the evidence against him.
Mistakes were made. The big question, yet to be answered, is did we learn enough from those mistakes or will we repeat them?
Vernos,
You may be completely correct in what you 'believe'. My point is that nobody, not Colin Powell, Cheney, Bush or Rumsfeld has said they knew the intelligence was flawed but took us to war anyway.
There is much evidence to show that the intelligence was flawed, but that doesn't 'prove' these men and others did not believe the intelligence was accurate.
You and others don't like the war, and don't like Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Powell and the choices they made and I get that. In a court of law however, unless you could get one or all of them to
'admit' they 'knew' the intelligence was inaccurate, it would be a travesty of justice to convict them of anything.... other than foolishly believing flawed intelligence.... and although that may have been stupid, it isn't a crime.
Michael
Vernos,
One more thing. I have great respect for Colin Powell and he has been repeatedly asked if he resigned because Bush and Cheney knew the intel was flawed and took us to war anyway. He hasn't said 'yes' that was the case. I know you'll say that's because he is an honorable man and that may be 'correct', but until he does answer that question with a simple yes, or Bush, Cheney or Rumsfeld admit what you believe, we just cannot 'know'; we can only 'guess'.
Michael
And Vernos, let me add this: I do not want to believe that an elected President intentionally used what he knew to be flawed intelligence to place us into a war where we did not belong to avenge his dad; for oil, because he was a cowboy, etc. I know it is possible, but I don't want it to be the truth.
Likewise, I do not want to believe another elected President really knows how dangerous the deficits and the debt is to our country and our children but refuses to address it in a meaningful way because it is too difficult, too unpopular and it gets in the way of other priorities he feels are more important. I know it is possible, but I don't want it to be the truth.
People are capable of doing very good things but also very bad things. That's just a fact and it doesn't become not a fact because the person is someone you like or dislike.
Michael
Joe Biden had the same number of deferments from the war. And he got the credit card company MBNA to pay for his mansion. The Dims envy you if you've made your money leveraging government.
The "crusade" by the US to invade Iraq was littered with with bad intel that was pushed forward for political expediency. Our government took a 50/50 approach with any terrorist it captured or "detained" prior to the roll up for the invasion. The information gathered wasn't looked at with clear vision. Expectation bias was the order of the day. Most of the Islamic extremists we "collected" and interrogated were more concerned about jihad with Bin Laden than anything else. More times than not when Iraq was brought up they had no clue why Iraq was even in the discussion.
Bin Laden won on multiple levels when we invaded Iraq. Sadly, the cost in human capital isn't measured 50/50.
For a good primer on the REAL causes behind these events you should read "Black Banners" by Ali Soufan an FBI agent who was in on the interrogations. The "jihad" actually started in 1979 and kept moving forward. Every President from that year forward shares blame in this debacle.
wtplv - "And Vernos, let me add this: I do not want to believe that an elected President intentionally used what he knew to be flawed intelligence to place us into a war where we did not belong to avenge his dad; for oil, because he was a cowboy, etc. I know it is possible, but I don't want it to be the truth."
LBJ did it, he and others in his administration took us into Vietnam over lies. The Pentagon Papers exposed the scam perpetrated on the American people. When will Americans begin to understand a few of our leaders are capable of almost anything to gain or maintain control of power. Does Joe McCarthy or Tricky Dick sound familiar?
Vernos....
Great series of posts by you. Thank you for what you said. You hit the nail on the head several times...
Casler continues to give the "triangular of three," Bush Cheney & Rummy, a free pass. Is Michael that naive or is his "Republicanism" bringing about a type of brain blockage that prevents him from seeing the truth.
All three should be in jail, not enjoying a wonderful retirement at tax payers expense. Cheney was the worst of the three but, the president himself had to agree to go along with the the whole series of lies or the war itself could not have happened....
All three have blood on their hands that will never wash away. I agree with you that Colin Powell decided to resign as Sec of State because of what came down & his guilt for being a part of it.....even if his part was very, very small!
The president is not above the law as Dick Nixon believed and as you pointed out, other presidents have also lied to the American people to achieve their agenda...
Vernos.....keep up the great posting. Keep holding people like Casler accountable.
Vernos,
I know all of it is 'possible'. I've lived long enough to see some of it. However, we'd all be better off if we would stick to what we can 'see' and stop attaching 'motives' we can't know.
Bush took us into Iraq. History proved that was a mistake, but we still don't 'know' the motives behind the decision. Obama probably isn't going to address the deficits and debt much. I think history will show that to be a mistake.
The difference is that I'm not willing to label Bush a 'war monger' or Obama a 'socialist' unless I 'know' the motives for the decisions they are making.
I try to stick to commenting on the decisions and stay away from 'labels' that are connected to their 'motives'.... something I cannot know.
This jumping to conclusions about 'motives' is destroying us and keeping us from compromise.
That's my point...
Michael
Pres.G.W.Bush an V.P. and Cheney had no clue of what was going on in Iraq.
They both proved how uninformed they were with events happening in Iraq. By having Bush aboard a navy jet plane and land it on the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln on May 2,2003 and declare that major combat is over in Iraq,"Mission Accomplished".
After that declaration was made we spent one trillion dollars and with the loss of life of 4,500 men and women, and over 40,000 wounded warriors. The war lasted over 8 years of U.S. involvement.And to think
V.P.Cheney has no regrets. That new heart he received did nothing for him except give him more time to defend the Bush Administration's Iraq failures.
As usual there is very little serious logic and reasoning going on amongst the true believers.
Bush took us to war in Iraq and Obama is the killer of US citizens via drone strikes. Who is the bigger criminal? Easy answer if you really understand the truth.
Pointing out that Presidents distort or manipulate the truth takes very little effort.
And yet you all give a pass to the latest war crimes president who claims he just voted on things but had no clue to what they were.
No matter how hard you libs try, you can;t have it both ways. want to charge Bush with war crimes? The socialist you replaced him with would face the same charges for the crimes he has committed since in office as well as for voting to allow Bush to do what he did. Obama had the same intelligence available to him as did Bush.
Ten years later, we are certain the ill-fated mission in Iraq was anything but accomplished.
Cheney, when asked about his avoidance of Vietnam said, "At that time I had other priorities than serving in the military." Ditto for GW Bush, Mitt Romney, and pretty much every rightwing hawk in Washington. Seems that privileged conservatives have an aversion to actual combat.
The Iraq War has officially ended but bills for the bad adventure keep coming. Current estimates peg the cost at $2.2 trillion -- and counting. And counting because of billions, er make that, trillions more that will be paid out long after Cheney's borrowed heart has quit beating.
Another casualty of the mismanaged war is the GOP's credibility on foreign policy issues. For decades Americans trusted republicans more than Democrats on national defense but that advantage has also been wasted. It's a lesson learned and the next president who screams, "Mushroom cloud!" better have more than just a guy named Curveball to back up his claims.
The "Mission Accomplished" banner was put up by the crew as they were coming home from an 8 month deployment and were justly proud of their duty. It was not put up by either Bush or Cheney. Despite this, it has become a dumbocrat talking point and parrotted by the liberal kneepad media.
rusty57 - "The "Mission Accomplished" banner was put up by the crew as they were coming home from an 8 month deployment"
The big aircraft carrier celebration was a made-for-television stunt to kick off Bush's reelection campaign. That's why Dubya flew in on a fighter jet, then strutted cross the flight deck decked out in leather pilot garb with helmet tucked triumphantly under arm. The carrier itself was a prop. The ship was headed to San Diego when the White House had it halted just beyond the horizen of the SoCal coastline.
Pure propaganda for sure. But like everything else Bush/Cheney engineered, a complete and dismal failure.
Given that almost all the media is biased either right or left, I have to wonder how Rusty57 'knows' that the sign was actually put up by the crew and Bush had nothing to do with it or that Lastthrows 'knows' that Bush stopped the ship just over the horizon so that he could have his photo op.
We are all so guilty of so easily believing anything the biased media tells us, as long as it conforms to our belief systems. Perhaps that is part of the reason so many of us elected Bush twice, and now Obama twice and we re-elect, over and over again people like McCain, Pelosi, Schumer, Reid, Boehner, etc.
We have met the enemy and he is us.....
Michael
Dick Cheney...the Hague is calling...
"Mission Accomplished", Well I can pretty much guarantee Iraq and Afghanistan are out of the WMD business as we speak today. To Ze-ev Amzalem, Maureen Dowd and the rest of the Monday morning historians, America has so called "credible WMD threats" coming from Iran and North Korea on the annihilation of Israel and America daily. Would you please enlighten the rest of us with your indicated precious psychic abilities as to what action if any should be taken.
The carrier Abraham Lincoln set the record for longest deployment---10 months. So the president, a former fightr pilot himself, flew out to greet them. Of course this would become a point of derision for the hate america types. I suppose the president could of had the crew take the sign down, but I can't even imagine Obama doing that.
Rusty57,
Those that hate Bush would complain about anything he was involved with. The 'real' problem is that his appearance made it seem like we had won and then the insurgency broke out and everything changed.
Michael
Obama has had Holder repeatedly tried to get Bush and Cheney and others on war crimes and never came up with any proof.
Holder has turn over every rock - Obama has directed everyone in his administration to produce proof - but there is non
Meanwhile Obama sends his drone out to murder thousands of people with no due process
Joe Biden said we need more gun laws because we don't have the time or money to enforce the ones we already have! Iran not even closed to a nuclear weapon, sanctions are working! North Korea just lobbed a missile into the sea of Japan and calls the media reptiles, I prefer juveniles but hatch-ling reptiles is an adequate description. I wonder if the world would take Caribou Barbie as seriously as they do Joe and the guy with the funny name. It's not Cheney and President Bush that the columnists and the hatch-lings are going easy on, I can't even tell who's side half of them represent.
I thought you Teabaggers don't want due process for terrorists, no matter where they are....
Comment removed by moderator. - -
Ever notice how the multitrillion dollar Iraq war is never mentioned by GOP/Teabagger budget hawks?
Apparently nation building is only good for other countries, not our own.
Brown Univerity study out today: The Iraq war direct cost, $1.7 trillion. Long term cost with care of troops could approach $6 trillion. That's a lot to spend for a profiteering war for Republican political donations and Daddy issues!!
"Pres.G.W.Bush an V.P. and Cheney had no clue of what was going on in Iraq."
Sam et al:
Saddam Hussein and Iraq gave safe haven to al Qaeda and the 9-11 terrorists. President Bush sent US troops to Iraq as did other countries in retaliation and reciprocation. THEN President Bush instituted the drone program.
"After 9/11, then U.S. President George W. Bush ordered U.S. drones, at that point equipped with missiles, to kill leaders of al Qaeda, first in Afghanistan and later in Yemen and Pakistan. From June 2004, when the strikes in Pakistan began, to January 2009, the Bush administration authorized 44 strikes in the rugged northwestern region of Pakistan."
If you like the drone program, and you do, then give former President Bush credit for starting and using it. Just like you give President Obama credit for expanding it.
Carmine D
"Saddam Hussein and Iraq gave safe haven to al Qaeda and the 9-11 terrorists."
File this in the "Everyone except Carmine and Dick Cheney has abandoned this theory" folder.
Saddam Hussein and bin Laden hated each other, al Qaeda being made up primarily of Sunni Muslims while Saddam was a Shi te.
Carmine, if you have actual hard proof of this claim, please post it. But you won't post such info because you don't have any, do you?
Again, complete BS.
I liken Bush 43 to the War Criminal Lyndon Baines Johnson. LBJ was the chief instigator of the Viet Nam cluster boink. He claimed the USS Turner Joy took enemy fire and that was a fabrication. He piled over 500,000 men and women into that crappy little country and 57 or 58 thousand never came back. We all know someone that died in that war and we all still mourn them. I will lead any contingent that we can amass into Texas and we will dig up that bastige LBJ and then we will hang him for his crimes.
Michael - watch this:
http://once.unicornmedia.com/now/od/auto...
Carmine absolutely lied:
"Saddam Hussein and Iraq gave safe haven to al Qaeda and the 9-11 terrorists. President Bush sent US troops to Iraq as did other countries in retaliation and reciprocation. THEN President Bush instituted the drone program."
I say:
Pure, unadulterated, Readers Digest on steroids fiction.
Jeff:
I suggest you read the 2008 Pentagon report before saying I lied. You may not agree with the report, but it clearly says both men [Bin Laden and Hussein] had mutual ties with their evil intent and acts against the US.
Carmine D
Here's an excerpt. You can research and read the rest:
"In March 2008, a Pentagon-sponsored study was released, entitled Saddam and Terrorism: Emerging Insights from Captured Iraqi Documents, based on the review of more than 600,000 Iraqi documents captured after the 2003 US invasion. The study "found no 'smoking gun' (i.e., direct connection) between Saddam's Iraq and al Qaeda."[109] It did note that in the early 1990s "Saddam supported groups that either associated directly with al Qaeda (such as the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, led at one time by bin Laden's deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri) or that generally shared al Qaeda's stated goals and objectives."[110]
The abstract states that, "while these documents do not reveal direct coordination and assistance between the Saddam regime and the al Qaeda network, they do indicate that Saddam was willing to use, albeit cautiously, operatives affiliated with al Qaeda as long as Saddam could have these terrorist--operatives monitored closely... This created both the appearance of and, in some ways, a 'de facto' link between the organizations. At times, these organizations would work together in pursuit of shared goals but still maintain their autonomy and independence because of innate caution and mutual distrust."[111]
Carmine D
The salient feature of the Iraq war was an excuse and opportunity by Bush, Cheney et.al. to throw money away. It was more expensive than WWII in 2012 dollars and created the massive debt that is claiming the National Parks, postal delivery days, medical care, etc.
Cheney and the GOP now claim that cut backs in social programs are required to rein in Government spending. At the same time, Senate Resolution 65, the Back Door to War with Iran is introduced (Feb 28, 2013).
S.Res.65 "(8) urges that, if the Government of Israel is compelled to take military action in self-defense, the United States Government should stand with Israel and provide diplomatic, military, and economic support to the Government of Israel in its defense of its territory, people, and existence."
Note that there is NO LIMIT on spending or involvement in the next Iran war. Another multitrillion dollar, decade long war is being planned by Lindsey Graham [R-SC]. Cheney will look like a wimp after the neo-confederates appropriate the treasury for elimination of another nuclear weapons program that doesn't exist in the first place. And like the Iraq war, don't expect an apology.
"Ayman Mohammed Rabie al-Zawahiri,[2] (Arabic: Ayman Muhammad Rabi az-Zawahiri, born 19 June 1951) is an Egyptian physician,[3] Islamic theologian and current leader of the militant Islamist organization al-Qaeda.[4] Ayman al-Zawahiri is a former member of Islamist organizations which have both orchestrated and carried out multiple attacks on the continents of North America, Asia, Africa and the Middle East.
The U.S. State Department has offered a US$25 million dollar reward for information leading to al-Zawahiri's apprehension since the 9/11 attacks and remains in effect.[5] He is under worldwide sanctions by the United Nations Security Council 1267 Committee as a member or affiliate of al-Qaeda.[6]"
Carmine D
An interesting comment PISCES41 (Jim Weber) at 5:16 a.m. today: "Mistakes were made. The big question, yet to be answered, is did we learn enough from those mistakes or will we repeat them?" We did not learn from the lessons of Vietnam but, rather, repeated them in Iraq, there is no reason to expect any learning from Iraq.
In both Vietnam and Iraq: We were taken into an overseas war of opportunity by the lies of our leadership. In both, we began the war with NO idea what goals we wanted to accomplish, but faked up some goals as we went along. In both, we continued the war long after our faked goals were achieved. In both we were supporting an unpopular regime. In both, large segments of the local population wanted us gone, long before we did leave. In both, the greatest number of casualties were among the local civilian population. In both, war crimes were committed and not at all, or were only poorly, investigated and punished. In both cases we waged a significant war with NO declaration of war from Congress, only mealy-mouthed "Oh, well. Go ahead." declarations. In both, we were defeated, practically or actually, take your choice, by forces that were not nearly as technologically advanced in the arts of war as we were. In both cases, once our civilian population realized the dead-end we were put into, it demanded a withdrawal - yet our "fearless leaders" refused.
I could continue, but I'm concerned about carpal-tunnel syndrome...
Obviously some of you people won't allow yourselves come to the realization that our gov't. will intentionally lie to us. It's called propaganda and until people understand that, we are fair game for further minipulation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0japj2XWN...
Wtplv-michael
I marvel at how you go from one sentence to another changing your views as you proceed. Cheney is a chicken hawk and you know it-yet you struggle to defend him with your alternating comments, and to further attempts to justify you add an occasional "red herring". If this is "how" an independent is supposed to thinks-I say forget about it.
Carmine is a hard core right winger and there is no hope to change any of his views even with clear and concise proof. However, sometimes you say the right thing, then two paragraphs later you inject something you know is BS.
VB, obviously you subscribe to the Cult of Personality theory. Obama has lied to us as we'll...... Multiple times.
All administrations do. Goebbels was just as important then as propaganda is now.
Carmine,
Pres.G.W.Bush invaded Iraq with false information about weapons of mass destruction.That was the reason he gave for the invasion, which was completely false.
He was way over his head as a leader and his actions as President proved that.May God forgive him for his misdeeds,because no one else will.
George Bush pulled the weapons inspector out of
Iraq when no weapons were found.
And started the war anyway.
What nuclear cloud was he talking about?
askmrmark.......
You're way off the mark.
NO, Obama DID NOT vote for bush to start the war.
Obama was not a Senator then.
And Obama was one of the few good men who said we
should NOT invade Iraq.
He said that before the war started.
That was one of the many reasons that I voted for
him.
Sam:
I was and still am against sending troops into Iraq. BUT read the 2008 Pentagon Report and Bush had credible and legitimate cause for invasion. You may not agree, like me, BUT we were not Commander-in-Chief and didn't have to make the call. Al Qaeda IS STILL in Iraq and responsible for untold bombings against US and our soldiers. Just this week and the other day.
Now what do you say about former President Bush's drone program...and keep in mind I, as you know, oppose it then and now. You on the other hand are a staunch proponent of President Obama's usage of drones. Who started drones?
Carmine D
"Carmine is a hard core right winger and there is no hope to change any of his views even with clear and concise proof"
Roger Warrick:
If you think that, I'd hate to be the forensic doctor who has to perform an autopsy on your brain when you die from the lack of using it.
Carmine D
"And Obama was one of the few good men who said we
should NOT invade Iraq."
Teamster:
Candidate Obama in 2008 said he was against dumb wars. I agree with him on this. I am too. And to his credit, so was now Defense Secretary Hagel, then Senator, although he waffled on some of his Iraq votes in the Senate. It is generally agreed that Hagel and Obama struck up their Senate friendship in large part to their shared beliefs on Iraq.
Carmine D
Jeff,
Please understand that I don't have to watch a documentary to know that the intelligence leading up to the Iraq war was terribly flawed.
The real question, to me at least, is whether President Bush made the decision he did because he felt that Iraq was a serious threat to America or he knew it wasn't and took us to war for another reason. No documentary can answer that question because the people involved have continued to say the decision to go to war was based on intelligence that turned out to be false, but they did not know that at that time.
If people want to believe that Bush took us to war because he wanted to spend money (a theory you hear often), wanted to get Iraqi oil for Cheney and Haliburton, wanted to avenge his dad, is a war cowboy, etc, etc, I cannot say they are not correct...but they cannot 'prove' they are correct either.
The truth is that we don't know and we may never know exactly what reasoning went into the decisions made by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell and Rice. In hindsight, many of the decisions appear to be bad decisions, but people make bad decisions for many reasons. I'd like to 'know' those reasons and unless we can get into the minds of these people, we 'cannot know'. We can only guess.
Michael
Carmine,
When the weapons inspector's found nothing and were unable to find any WMD as "Teamster" pointed out, Pres. Bush infact pulled out the inspector's so he could have his war in Iraq.
Instead of listening to his Generals( Eric Shinseki) who advised using 300,000 troops he invaded with just 140,0000 troops. The situation quickly turned around and we were stuck in Iraq for over 8 years, until Pres. Obama pulled us out.
Carmine and Michael,
This is settled argument. Take off the blinders.
On April 29, 2007, former Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet said on 60 Minutes, "We could never verify that there was any Iraqi authority, direction and control, complicity with al-Qaeda for 9/11 or any operational act against America, period."
Operation Iraqi Freedom documents
The U.S. government released documents, called the 'Operation Iraqi Freedom documents', regarding which the Pentagon has cautioned it has made 'no determination regarding the authenticity of the documents, validity or factual accuracy.'" Some claim the information contained in some of the documents suggest Saddam and al Qaeda may have been willing to work together. 9/11 Commission member Bob Kerrey looked at some of the documents and "was careful to say that new documents translated last night by ABC News did not prove Saddam Hussein played a role in any way in plotting the attacks of September 11, 2001." Nevertheless, Kerrey stated that one of the documents suggests that "Saddam was a significant enemy of the United States."
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence has already looked at the documents and warned that "amateur translators won't find any major surprises, such as proof Hussein hid stockpiles of chemical weapons." The Pentagon also went through the documents and released an official study of the documents; the study does not report on any evidence linking Saddam to al-Qaeda (see below). The 2006 Senate Select Committee on Intelligence concluded that "additional reviews of documents recovered in Iraq are unlikely to provide information that would contradict the Committee's findings or conclusions." Intelligence expert Steven Aftergood suggested that many are using the release of these documents as an opportunity to find "a retrospective justification for the war in Iraq."
On March 21, 2006, Bush sought to distance himself from the allegation of any link. He said: "First, just if I might correct a misperception, I don't think we ever said -- at least I know I didn't say that there was a direct connection between September the 11th and Saddam Hussein. Bush reaffirmed the White House position in even stronger terms in a press conference on 21 August 2006. When asked what the connection was between Iraq and the September 11th attacks, Bush replied, "Nothing.... Nobody has ever suggested that the attacks of September the 11th were ordered by Iraq."Opponents of his Iraq policy charged that his statement was inconsistent with his letter to Congress of March 21, 2003 and a minority (Democrat) staff report by the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Government Reform claimed that "in 125 separate appearances, they [Bush, Cheney, Powell, Rumsfeld and Rice] made ... 61 misleading statements about Iraq's relationship with al-Qaeda."
From Lawrence B. "Larry" Wilkerson, retired United States Army Colonel and former chief of staff to United States Secretary of State Colin Powell.
During an October 19, 2005 speech at the New America Foundation, Wilkerson criticized the intelligence community which compiled the Iraq War intelligence.
"I can't tell you why the French, the Germans, the Brits and us thought that most of the material, if not all of it, that we presented at the U.N. on 5 February 2003 was the truth "
-- Lawrence Wilkerson, New America Foundation, October 19, 2005
In a 2006 interview Wilkerson said that the speech Powell made before the United Nations on February 5, 2003--which laid out a case for war with Iraq--included falsehoods of which Powell had never been made aware. He said, "My participation in that presentation at the UN constitutes the lowest point in my professional life. I participated in a hoax on the American people, the international community and the United Nations Security Council. "Wilkerson said in 2011 that his preparing of the presentation was "probably the biggest mistake of my life", he regrets it, and that he regrets not resigning over it.
He stated in the 2006 interview that neither CIA Director George Tenet nor the CIA analysts that gave Powell information on mobile biological laboratories explained that there were disputes about the reliability of the informants who had supplied the information--information which was used in the speech.
Wilkerson also agreed with the interviewer that Cheney's frequent trips to the CIA would have brought "undue influence" on the agency. When asked if Cheney was "the kind of guy who could lean on somebody" he responded, "Absolutely. And be just as quiet and taciturn about it as-- he-- as he leaned on 'em. As he leaned on the Congress recently-- in the-- torture issue."
Wilkerson stood by his earlier description of Cheney and Rumsfeld as having formed a cabal to hijack the decision-making process: "I'm worried and I would rather have the discussion and debate in the process we've designed than I would a diktat from a dumb strongman... I'd prefer to see the squabble of democracy to the efficiency of dictators."
Further:
A 1998 letter to President Clinton"
It hardly needs to be added that if Saddam does acquire the capability to deliver weapons of mass destruction, as he is almost certain to do if we continue along the present course, the safety of American troops in the region, of our friends and allies like Israel and the moderate Arab states, and a significant portion of the world's supply of oil will all be put at hazard. As you have rightly declared, Mr. President, the security of the world in the first part of the 21st century will be determined largely by how we handle this threat.
Given the magnitude of the threat, the current policy, which depends for its success upon the steadfastness of our coalition partners and upon the cooperation of Saddam Hussein, is dangerously inadequate. The only acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility that Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction. In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake military action as diplomacy is clearly failing. In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. That now needs to become the aim of American foreign policy.
We urge you to articulate this aim, and to turn your Administration's attention to implementing a strategy for removing Saddam's regime from power. This will require a full complement of diplomatic, political and military efforts. Although we are fully aware of the dangers and difficulties in implementing this policy, we believe the dangers of failing to do so are far greater. We believe the U.S. has the authority under existing UN resolutions to take the necessary steps, including military steps, to protect our vital interests in the Gulf. In any case, American policy cannot continue to be crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council.
We urge you to act decisively. If you act now to end the threat of weapons of mass destruction against the U.S. or its allies, you will be acting in the most fundamental national security interests of the country. If we accept a course of weakness and drift, we put our interests and our future at risk.
SIGNED BY the Bloodthirsty architects of the Iraq war after 911 as listed below:
Elliott Abrams ----- Richard L. Armitage ----- William J. Bennett -----
Jeffrey Bergner ----- John Bolton ----- Paula Dobriansky
----- Francis Fukuyama ----- Robert Kagan ----- Zalmay Khalilzad -----
William Kristol ----- Richard Perle ----- Peter W. Rodman -----
Donald Rumsfeld ----- William Schneider, Jr. ----- Vin Weber
----- Paul Wolfowitz ----- R. James Woolsey ----- Robert B. Zoellick
Condeleeza Rice was asked why we invaded Iraq even though Saddam did not have WMD's and she replied, "Because Saddam was paying Palestinians to become suicide bombers against Israel" That is the main reason Dubya & Cheney invaded Iraq with a compliant media cheering them on. Remember Sheldon Adelson was a big supporter of Dubya and also supported Romney because he wanted to get rid of Israel's other enemy, Iran. If Romney had won, we would already be in Iran!
It's beyond funny....the extent that the right-wingers on this board will go to in order to defend the Bush administrationa decision to take us into an unneeded war in Iraq.
This is also the same group who will go to any extreme to throw rocks at President Obama....
People such as Carmine, has even made the claim that the economy is improving only because of the leadership of the Repblicans.....
In other words, the refusal of the GOP to work with Obama has been a positive thing for the economy according to Carmine.
Carmine also would have you believe that the death of Bin Laden came about because of the work of the Bush administration, and Obama just rode their coat tails to rid the world of the world's biggest terrorist.
In other words, the Bush administration did all the work & Obama took all the credit for killing Bin Laden.
I guess Carmine & his right-wing buddies ignore the fact that junior said at one point in time that he didn't really care about the where abouts of Bin Laden & Bin Laden wasn't a major target for his administration....
It's not surprising that the Republicans got their butt kicked in last November's election. Why would anyone with even half a brain vote Republican??
What do they offer a majority of Americana? What part of their agenda, if put in place, would actually move this country forward?
Jeff:
Everything you sourced, EVERYTHING, predates the 2008 Pentagon report, which is by far the best and final source on the matter. Read it. Like I said, you don't have to agree with it, I DON'T. But it clearly shows that all the available US intelligence, European intelligence and Israeli intelligence gave a green light to President Bush to invade. In hindsight it was flawed. But that's hindsight. And in hindsight we all of the benefit of 20 -20 vision. Even you.
Carmine D
Sam:
I was against sending US troops to Iraq, and to Afghanistan and likely to Pakistan, if we do also. I am and have been against the use of drones, unlike you, which happen ion concert in these countries. But, just as I understand the reasons for Bush and President Obama using drones and, your and others support of them, I also understand the reasons for Bush sending, and Obama keeping, at least for now, US troops in Iraq, Afghanistan and possibly even Pakistan. It's the war on terror. A war by all accounts understated by the current Administration and many Republicans too.
Carmine D
"guess Carmine & his right-wing buddies ignore the fact that junior said at one point in time that he didn't really care about the where abouts of Bin Laden & Bin Laden wasn't a major target for his administration...."
Former President Bush was stating the exact same all the intelligence and military experts said and are still saying. Taking out Bin-laden would not take out Al Qaeda. And, if you're honest, you would agree. It hasn't. Al Qaeda is just as alive and dangerous now without Bin-laden as with him. Another just rose to top and will continue with every top Al Qaeda leader killed. The war is and has always been on terrorism, al Qaeda, Taliban, and dozens more like them, not Bin-laden.
Carmine D
Carmine said:
"Everything you sourced, EVERYTHING, predates the 2008 Pentagon report, which is by far the best and final source on the matter. Read it. Like I said, you don't have to agree with it, I DON'T."
I say:
That is NOT a defense department report. Even if what you claim is true is true, it is not justification for preemptive war against a loony toon dictator.
You claimed "safe harbor and warehousing the 911 terrorists" That is not addressed in anything but a footnote sort of way a decade before the suicide bombings in NYC, Washington DC and PA.
CarmineD (Carmine DiFazio), in the wee smallhours this morning (3:57 a.m.) you posted a comment that included "...read the 2008 Pentagon Report and Bush had credible and legitimate cause for invasion." At the time, Bush was CinC, in the pentagon's direct chain of command. I question whether the Pentagon would would publish anything that cast doubt about an order from their commander.
Just a few minutes ago you stated that "The war is and has always been on terrorism, al Qaeda, Taliban, and dozens more like them, not Bin-laden." True - except for the CinC stating that he had no real interest in finding bin-Laden, the figurehead (at the very least) behind the NYC bombings and the immediate subject of the Congressional resolution authorizing military action against bin-Laden and the terrorists behind that bombing. But he had a very real and urgent resolve to take action against Iraq and Saddam Hussein, despite a lack of any true evidence of either having been involved in the bombing or terrorism against the US.
At the end, was Saddam Hussein friend of the US? Unlikely. An enemy? Probably. Was he paying Palestinians to become suicide bombers against Israel as BushDepression, (above, 12:57 p.m.) quoted Condeleeza Rice? Highly probable. Did he push Iraqi troops into Kuwait? Very definitely.
What part of this specifically authorizes the President to unilaterally set in motion an invasion? And use that odd Congressional resolution as his justification?
Remember, during that same time North Korea was making actively declaiming its antipathy toward the US and it's specific intention to develop nuclear weapons. (Note - Bush ignored No. Korea. Look what its leader just announced - an intent to fire a nuclear weapon into the US).
"At the time, Bush was CinC, in the pentagon's direct chain of command. I question whether the Pentagon would would publish anything that cast doubt about an order from their commander."
Robert:
It was released March 2008. Bush was a lame duck President in the final 6 months of his last term. What better time to call him out for his mistakes if not then? With both public sentiment and the mainstream media increasingly sounding the alarms against the Iraqi war and having US troops there?
Carmine D
Robert:
Here's the justification from the UN for Iraqi invasion:
Mission objectives according to the MNF-I
MNF-I [Multi-national Forces] objectives, as at June 2004 as expressed in an annex to UNSCR 1546, a letter from U.S. Secretary of State Powell to the U.N. Security Council, appear to be:[6]
"The MNF under unified command is prepared to continue to contribute to the maintenance of security in Iraq, including by preventing and deterring terrorism and protecting the territory of Iraq. The goal of the MNF will be to help the Iraqi people to complete the political transition and will permit the United Nations and the international community to work to facilitate Iraq's reconstruction."
You can disagree, and I did and still do, but this was passed and approved by the UN.
Carmine D
Maureen was probably invited to go hunting with Cheney before the article was published. All those that would go hunting with the man take two steps forward.
"On 3 August 1990, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 660 condemning the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and demanding that Iraq unconditionally withdraw all forces deployed in Kuwait.[39] After a series of failed negotiations between major world powers and Iraq, the United States-led coalition forces launched a massive military assault on Iraq and Iraqi forces stationed in Kuwait in mid January 1991. By January 16, Allied aircraft were targeting several Iraqi military sites and the Iraqi Air Force was said to be "decimated".[40] Hostilities continued until late February and on February 25, Kuwait was officially liberated from Iraq.[41] On 15 March 1991, the Emir of Kuwait returned to the country after spending more than 8 months in exile.[42] During the Iraqi occupation, about 1,000 Kuwaiti civilians were killed and more than 300,000 residents fled the country."
Carmine D
"(Note - Bush ignored No. Korea. Look what its leader just announced - an intent to fire a nuclear weapon into the US)."
Robert: Your history is blur and foggy. Who prevented the expanding of the ICBM defense system and dismantled it? Now, Hagel wants to add 42 more interceptors, a s result of the North Korean threat, that will take 4 years to but in place.
"Axis of evil is a term initially used by the former United States President George W. Bush in his State of the Union Address on January 29, 2002, and often repeated throughout his presidency, describing governments that he accused of helping terrorism and seeking weapons of mass destruction. Iran, Iraq and North Korea were portrayed by George W. Bush during the State of the Union as building nuclear weapons. The Axis of Evil was used to pinpoint these common enemies of the United States and ally the country in support of the war on terror."
Carmine D
"The Obama administration opposes expansion of long-range ground based interceptors in favor of its European-based missile defenses that call for developing an enhanced version of the Navy SM-3 interceptor that can knock out ICBMs." Feb 2012
Carmine D
Hmmmmmmm...we all know who Carmine voted for in 2000 & 2004, don't we?
To hear Carmine tell it, the invasion of Iraq was justified and George junior had very right to believe that Saddam was part of 9/11, and not only that, he was harboring terrorists....
El Lobo:
Saddam Hussein was part of the same ilk as al Qaeda, the Taliban and dozens more terrorist entities around the world who target the US, Europe, mid east, Africa and on and on. You might think that we live in a safe and secure world free from evil and senseless murder by terrorism but you would be the only one. History here and abroad don't support your view.
Carmine D
Carmine.
You have stated more then once that you were against sending U.S. Ground forces into both Iraq and Afghanistan.
Yet you do imply that Former Pres.G.W.Bush was justified in the invasion of Iraq in 2003.It has been the subject of many in the know that this war was not based on facts, only manufactured
and false intelligence.
Carmine, you do not understand dictators. The LAST THING a (Stalinist) dictator like Saddam Hussein wants in his country is a stong, armed group not completely under his control. IF there was Al-Qaeda in his country, he would have done all he could to eliminate them since they could someday challenge his rule. Al-Qaeda surfaced in Irq AFTER we invaded and created a fluid situation with no strong central government. In essence, Bush and Cheney with their idiotic war for profit and daddy issues brought Al-Qaeda into Iraq as a unintended consequence.
Sam:
I was and still am. And I will be opposed to sending US troops into Pakistan to fight a war on terror, if we do and we likely will.
I posted the UN resolutions for both the Iraqi and Afghanistan Wars. Why? There was a coalition of the willing around the world for troops to be sent to both countries and to fight both wars. Not just the US. The US erred and the intelligence was faulty. But that's true of all the countries' intelligence and willingness. Not just the US and George Bush.
I have a standing rule of thumb. I never waiver from it. A US President-Commander in Chief should never send American troops to fight on foreign soil UNLESS and UNTIL that President-Commander in Chief has walked the battlefield of the American dead and wounded. And seen, heard and smelled the dead and dying Americans.
Then and only then has the President-Commander in Chief earned the right to do so.
Carmine D
BTW Sam:
I was and still am against our drone policies, not just in the USA but abroad. That's no secret. I've said it over and over again here. Drones started with Bush and President Obama ramped drone policy up to another level. I criticized both Presidents for it. And I will criticize the next President too, if he/she does. And likely he/she will ramp up higher than the previous two presidents.
Carmine D
Carmine,
"I was and still am. And I will be opposed to sending Troops into Pakistan to fight a war on terror.If we do and likely will".
I don't believe Pres.Obama will send ground troops into Pakistan.He has withdrawn all troops from Iraq,and is currently downsizing our troop strength in Afghanistan for a exit by 2014.That would be a stupid war(Pakistan)like he has described the war in Iraq as just that.
No Sam, thank goodness President Obama won't, but he surely will use drones. And you know how I feel and think about them.
Carmine D
Carmine - what would you use in place of the drones inside Iran, when we KNOW without a doubt that Israel is about to have terror rained down on it by a group of 10 suicide bombers and you have them all in one place?
Our choices, as I see it is to bomb, bomb, bomb Iran, deploy marines on the ground, use a drone to surgically take out the suicide bombers, or sit on our hands.
I have a feeling you would make the worst choice.
Carmine,
I will ask the same question as Jeff, how would you fight off terrorists?
Not with robots that don't have consciences. Drones take the lives of innocents who are killed in more numbers than those targeted by the drones. And now I ask you a question: What will we do when other countries have drones too?
Nuclear weapons and drones are the same. Neither should be used ever as capriciously and arbitrarily as they were and are. President Truman made the decision to drop the bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. After seeing the photos of the carnage, not only did he keep them from the world to see, but he said he regretted having used the bombs. Why? Hundreds of thousands of innocent women, men and children were killed, injured and suffered enormously. As Socrates said: It is much better to endure evil than to do it.
Carmine D
"I have a feeling you would make the worst choice."
Jeff:
Your choices are not the only ones. Nor are they true. Israel's leaders starting with Netanyahu know that its existence depends on itself not the USA. Despite what President Obama says. My choice for Israel. Start pouring the cement and building the houses.
Carmine D
Sam:
My issue with President Obama is his hypocrisy. As a candidate he skewered President Bush and his administration its use of waterboarding as cruel and unusual punishment. Keep in mind 3 persons were waterboarded and by all accounts provided valuable information for the war on terror. Tell me Sam how many innocent people have been killed by drones authorized and approved during the Obama administration? What's the difference? What do you prefer Sam as a government approved policy: Waterboarding or death by drone?
Carmine D
Carmine, I will go back to my original question.How do you purpose we fight terrorists? Who I might ad will kill us all given the chance.
Sam:
Look at North Africa. I've used this example with you before [Romney not President Obama told us this in the October presidential debates when he specifically cited Mali. Do you remember? It came true!!]. Al Qaeda uses countries in North Africa to stage, test and train terrorists. A group of them attacked the multi-national natural gas plant in January 2013 killing and injuring workers there from several countries. CIVILIANS!! Including killing 3 of 8 American workers. What happened? The US provided UNMANNED UNARMED DRONES [INTELLIGENCE DRONES] WITH INTEL TO THE LOCALS so they in concert with their own US TRAINED TROOPS could take out the terrorist leaders responsible for the attack. The two Al Qaeda leaders, BTW, were killed within a month of the event. The surviving Americans were interviewed within weeks of their rescue on American TV [Charlie Rose Show].
To my knowledge Sam I've answered all your questions here. When will you reciprocate and answer mine?
Carmine D
Carmine,
"Nuclear weapons and drones are the same".
That is not a very good comparision nuclear weapons and drones.Nuclear weapons can kill millions drones are used for specific small targets which kill a few.
As long as we have U.S. military men and women in combat facing daily suicide bombers. I support the use of drones to take out terrorists.
You might ask Iran who supply IED's and other weapon's to these Iraqi and Afghanistan terrorists. Why they deliberatly kill men,women,and children,in the name of Allah.
Sam:
I don't think you are saying that it's okay to kill one, two or three innocent people at a time with a drone attack. But not okay to kill thousands of innocents with nuclear weapons? Are you? If so, then you're saying it's the numbers of innocents killed that make a difference? A few innocents killed are okay, but more are not? That's wrong in my view. Life is life. One innocent killed or 100,000 killed are both just as wrong. Nukes and drones are the same. Shouldn't be used. UNLESS the drones are for INTEL and/or enemy targets and kills ONLY. No innocent collateral deaths.
I answered all your questions Sam. You haven't answered any of mine.
Carmine D
"You might ask Iran who supply IED's and other weapon's to these Iraqi and Afghanistan terrorists. Why they deliberately kill men, women, and children, in the name of Allah.
Well Sam you are making the same argument the UN resolution made for invading Iraq and Afghanistan. The war on terror. It wasn't Bush's war [war on terror]. It was an American war. Both wars [Iraq and Afghanistan] had bipartisan US support [including both Clintons and all the candidates of the 2004 presidential race] and a coalition of countries around the world who all agreed that the wars and invasions were justified.
As public sentiment in favor of the wars waned, [as soon as the body bags and coffins start coming home it always does] all these pro-war people absolved themselves of the guilt and responsibility. Leaving President Bush, Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld holding the bag [no pun intended]. That's not correct history. It's spin.
Carmine D
Carmine,
"Well Sam you are making the same argument the UN resolution made for invading Iraq and Afghanistan".
Iran was not providing IED's and other weapons for the killing of innocents before Pres. Bush's invasion of Iraq.Unlike you I was in full support for the U.S. to go after Bin Laden in Afghanistan with full military backing.I was not in favor of the Iraq invasion in 2003.
If Pres. G.W.Bush had not invaded Iraq, we could have finished our mission in Afghanistan years ago with less casualties and a clear victory.Pres.Bush and V.P.Cheney will one day have to answer to their maker,for their actions.
Sam:
Iran was and still is a country that sponsors terrorism against the US among other countries. Right now, Iran is supplying weapons to the Syrian regime and dictator to kill innocent Syrians. Over 60,000 in the last year and still counting. Today, the Syrian regime used chemical weapons against Syrians. A concern and fear that many have had and voiced including me. I said here Syria would use chemical weapons over a year ago in order to prevent it's government from toppling to the rebels.
I supported killing Bin Laden and all the Al Qaeda terrorists responsible for 9-11. Not by war and use of drones, except for intelligence gathering. But by coordinated mutually approved and defined efforts with countries and governments to take them out. Just as we did with the case I always cite to you: The natural gas plant in Africa.
Carmine D
"If Pres. G. W. Bush had not invaded Iraq, we could have finished our mission in Afghanistan years ago with less casualties and a clear victory. Pres. Bush and V.P. Cheney will one day have to answer to their maker, for their actions."
Sam:
Afghanistan by all accounts is succeeding against the Taliban. 85 percent of all the fighting in Afghanistan is lead by the Afghans. And 75 percent of the casualties are Afghans. By all accounts they are better fighters than the Iraqis. And the Afghans want the US there and always have. Sadly, the man in charge in Afghanistan leaves a lot to be desired and still has US government support. But the Taliban are going into Pakistan. Pakistan is giving the Taliban safe haven and cover. And sadly, Pakistan would like very much to invade and topple the government in India, an ally of the US.
Carmine D
"Pres. Bush and V.P. Cheney will one day have to answer to their maker,for their actions.
Sam:
If you are talking about Iraq, the list of those who will have to answer is longer than just these two. There was bipartisan support in the US for invading Iraq. Including all the Presidential and Vice Presidential hopefuls in 2004 except for Ron Paul. As well as a host of UN countries which all supported a multi-national invasion led by the US. Just read the UN resolutions I posted here.
Carmine D
I would ask Michael Casler if he knows the origin of the phrase "We have met the enemy and he is us" that he quoted in an earlier post.
Carmine,
We are talking about Iraq. Some say faulty intelligence,others say made to order intelligence as a cause for war.I believe Bush,Cheney and Rumsfeld,left us with a lot of unanswered questions.Colin Powell was duped. They also left a a mess. The final outcome of this war may be years away from a finish.
I have clearly stated that Iran is and has been supplying weapons to both Iraq and Afghanistan to kill our troops and also innocent iraqi's.So it's no secret about what Iran is and has been doing.
Sam:
WRT Iraq: "The overthrow of Saddam Hussein's regime became official US policy in 1998 when President Clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act-a bill passed 360-38 by the House of Representatives and by unanimous consent in the Senate. The law called for training and equipping Iraqi dissidents to overthrow Saddam and suggested that the United Nations establish a war-crimes tribunal for the dictator and his lieutenants."
Why? "Saddam's military repeatedly fired on U.S. and allied aircraft that were attempting to prevent his regime from destroying Iraqi opposition forces in northern and southern Iraq."
Carmine D