IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 1 active user | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New A fairly hawkish article
And it ends sort of suggesting that the people who pushed for an invasion of Iraq did the right thing -- which I don't agree with. However, it's a very interesting piece, and has some interesting insights as to why the key players made the decisions they did.

[link|http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/03/24/timep.saddam.tm/|http://www.cnn.com/2.../timep.saddam.tm/]

Of course, it assumes that neo-conservatism is a valid way of looking at the world. I don't.
"We are all born originals -- why is it so many of us die copies?"
- Edward Young
New Some quotes.
In January 1998, Wolfowitz joined other neoconservatives in signing a letter to Clinton arguing that "containment" of Saddam had failed and asserting that "removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power ... needs to become the aim of American foreign policy." In a prescient note, the letter said, "American policy cannot continue to be crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the U.N. Security Council."
This isn't about "unanimity". In this action, we are in the minority.

Cheney had been charged with developing a policy on homeland security in response to asymmetric threats, which meant that Iraq's continued possession of WMDs was a problem that landed on his desk. In morning intelligence briefings, says a former Administration official, the Vice President began to raise questions about Saddam's regime.
None found, none used, yet Iraq's "possession" of them is a problem.

Cheney and others, says the official, would say things like, "Tell me about Iraq, tell me about Iraq, tell me about Iraq. What's the status of their WMDs? What's their support of terrorism?" When senior members of the intelligence community answered that they had little new information on Iraq--no smoking guns on WMDs or terrorism--the message would come back: "Try harder. Need to know more." In an interview with the New Yorker in May 2001, Cheney in two sentences linked North Korea, Iran and Iraq--the three countries that were later immortalized as the "axis of evil"--as threats to American security. Cheney still didn't buy into the whole neoconservative analysis.
Again, the "facts" are already "known".

All that is required is to dig up the substantiation for those "facts".

And the article continues on.

No questioning whether the "facts" used to "justify" this "war" are correct or not.

Just pure hero worship.
New As I said, I don't agree...
I simply thought the explanations of each players "motivation" was interesting.
"We are all born originals -- why is it so many of us die copies?"
- Edward Young
New article has a gaping & blatant flaw in it (mis info?)

Bush was talking about invading Iraq well before 9/11 - we discussed this very issue here in Newsclips back in late 2000 or early 2001 (I am sure it started soon after Bush was elected IIRC.

9/11 just delayed the event. This article is falsely conveying that 9/11 provided the impetus which just isn't true, it provided an excuse.

Doesn't anyone else recall us debating the issue of how serious Bush was about going after Iraq ?

I recall it only to well - my position was that Bush was signalling his intent, then in 2001 9/11 happened.

I would argue that this document is an attempt at history revisionism (distract from the real facts) or was written by an ignorant journalist (which I kind of doubt).

Cheers

Doug Marker


Spectres from our past: Beware the future when your children & theirs come after you for what you may have been willing to condone today - dsm 2003


Motivational: When performing activities, ask yourself if the person you most want to be would do, or say, it - dsm 2003
New Didn't know that
I didn't come to this forum very often -- not until very recently.
"We are all born originals -- why is it so many of us die copies?"
- Edward Young
     A fairly hawkish article - (cwbrenn) - (4)
         Some quotes. - (Brandioch) - (1)
             As I said, I don't agree... - (cwbrenn)
         article has a gaping & blatant flaw in it (mis info?) - (dmarker) - (1)
             Didn't know that - (cwbrenn)

Dr. Peter prescribes a nice warm cup of shut the hell up.
44 ms