Vet Accusses Bush/Cheney of War Crimes

[Vol Main]

Why I am no longer a Republican

"...the mood among conservatives began to grow fierce. Some columnists denied the effectiveness of deterrence against states and advocated unilateral preventive war to overthrow hostile regimes instead. Others openly promoted American imperialism. Still others explicitly proposed that the United States act to topple the governments of a series of sovereign nations in the Muslim Middle East, including Iraq, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia."

This article about the Iraq War by a former Republican might seem a bit labored in the beginning, but it finishes with three interesting points in three paragraphs... first, second, and third.

 

[PKT_VOL]

Why I am no longer a Republican

This article by a former Republican might seem a bit labored in the beginning, but it finishes with three interesting points(paragraphs) about the Iraq War.

In other words, the Iraq War was a mistake.

 

[Vol Main]

In other words, the Iraq War was a mistake.

The war accomplished the goals of those who planned it, but they only got one war when they wanted at least six.

 

[PKT_VOL]

The war accomplished the goals of those who planned it, but they only got one war when they wanted at least six.

All out war, though?

 

[Vol Main]

All out war, though?

War with American armies. "Still others explicitly proposed that the United States act to topple the governments of a series of sovereign nations in the Muslim Middle East, including Iraq, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia." Who really believed that American interests would be served by invading and occupying all of them? Nobody. Who really believed that we could impose liberal democracies in these six nations? Nobody. So why did they advocate doing that?

What do these six nations have in common?

 

[PKT_VOL]

War with American armies. "Still others explicitly proposed that the United States act to topple the governments of a series of sovereign nations in the Muslim Middle East, including Iraq, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia." Who really believed that American interests could be served by invading and occupying all of them? Nobody. Who really believed that we could impose liberal democracies in all six nations? Nobody. So why did they advocate doing that?

What do these six nations have in common?

You are kinda proving my point for me. We went to all out war with Iraq. I doubt they meant all out war with all of them. I am thinking covert wars (help with opposition) type intervention.

 

[Vol Main]

You are kinda proving my point for me. We went to all out war with Iraq. I doubt they meant all out war with all of them. I am thinking covert wars (help with opposition) type intervention.

People doubted that they meant all out war in Iraq when they first proposed a covert war, during the Clinton Administration. During the Bush Administration, they removed all doubt. If you doubt they mean US military intervention in all six countries, then you have not read their war plans in their own words. If you think those war plans don't still exist, then you need to think again. They do still exist.

 

[MG1968]

this letter is making the rounds on Facebook, primarily from Obama supporters, which is ironic since, going by the standards of this vet, Obama is just as big a war criminal as Bush/Cheney

 

[PKT_VOL]

People doubted that they meant all out war in Iraq when they first proposed a covert war, during the Clinton Administration. During the Bush Administration, they removed all doubt. If you doubt they mean US military intervention in all six countries, then you have not read their war plans in their own words. If you think those war plans don't still exist, then you need to think again. They do still exist.

Who exactly is "they"? Neocons?

All out war with six countries, without extenuating circumstances, is not plausible. Thus, I don't give any plans much credence.

The pentagon has thousands of theoretical operations and war plans for all sorts of scenarios that might arise. I don't give those much credence either even though the technically exists.

 

[Vol Main]

Who exactly is "they"? Neocons?

All out war with six countries, without extenuating circumstances, is not plausible. Thus, I don't give any plans much credence.

The pentagon has thousands of theoretical operations and war plans for all sorts of scenarios that might arise. I don't give those much credence either even though the technically exists.

Your point is well made, exactly the thinking in the Congress when they received proposals from lobbyists to fund covert action against Iraq during the Clinton Administration. Clinton was not going to go to war with Iraq. The idea of actually using US military forces was too far fetched to be taken seriously, so they did not worry about that eventuality when they passed one Resolution of Congress after another which led to exactly that outcome during the next Republican Administration. It was too far fetched to happen, but that is what happened.

 

[PKT_VOL]

Your point is well made, exactly the thinking in the Congress when they received proposals from lobbyists to fund covert action against Iraq during the Clinton Administration. Clinton was not going to go to war with Iraq. The idea of actually using US military forces was too far fetched to be taken seriously, so they did not worry about that eventuality when they passed one Resolution of Congress after another which led to exactly that outcome during the next Republican Administration. It was too far fetched to happen, but that is what happened.

You are putting two totally different things together.

 

[Vol Main]

You are putting two totally different things together.

No, I'm not.

"If you doubt they mean US military intervention in all six countries, then you have not read their war plans in their own words." Post #207

Do you think Damon Linker just made up the material in his article? He was an editor of a "religious right" magazine who left the Republican party because of these well known facts. Why do you discount this information? Is it because it is so bad that you just don't want to believe it?

 

[PKT_VOL]

No, I'm not.

"If you doubt they mean US military intervention in all six countries, then you have not read their war plans in their own words." Post #207

A few people's plans and theories are inconsequential unless the country signs off on them.

 

[Vol Main]

A few people's plans and theories are inconsequential unless the country signs off on them.

We are talking about far more than merely "a few people." The country did sign off on going to war with Iraq. The Administration's arguments for going to war were later proven false; the so-called intelligence was cooked. When a reporter confronted Ahmed Chalabi in Iraq with accusations that he had fabricated false intelligence used to start the war, he defended his actions with two words, "We're here."

 

[Toujours Pret]

This will probably get buried in here, but this incident is a pretty good summation of the mentality of the folks running DoD at the time
Ambushed: Documents shine some light on Oregon soldier's death | KATU Investigators | KATU.com - Portland News, Sports, Traffic Weather and Breaking News - Portland, Oregon

 

[PKT_VOL]

We are talking about far more than merely "a few people." The country signed off on going to war with Iraq. The Administration's arguments for going to war were later proven false; the so-called intelligence was cooked. When a reporter confronted Ahmed Chalabi in Iraq with accusations that he had fabricated false intelligence used to start the war, he replied with two words, "We're here."

There was also intelligence around the world which thought similar things.

No doubt that there was cherry picked intelligence here.

 

[Dummy]

I don't know about war crimes...but they certainly should have been charged with murder, fraud and racketeering.

 

[FLVOL69]

I don't know about war crimes...but they certainly should have been charged with murder, fraud and racketeering.

You've got the right name.....smh

 

[Vol Main]

There was also intelligence around the world which thought similar things.

No doubt that there was cherry picked intelligence here.

There was fraudulent intelligence from around the world. When President Bush gave his State of the Union Address to Congress and claimed intelligence from an ally that Saddam was trying to obtain yellow cake uranium in Africa, the evidence was a forged document from Italy. I think it was channeled through the British. OSP in the Pentagon piped the forgery directly to the White House. CIA had determined that the document was an obvious forgery and directly warned the White House not to use it. When asked later why they used the forgery in spite of the CIA warning, a WH official said they forgot about the CIA warning. The WH did not investigate or prosecute the forgery, they used the forgery in the President's speech and then said they forgot it was a forgery.

 

[PKT_VOL]

There was fraudulent intelligence from around the world. When President Bush gave his State of the Union Address to Congress and claimed intelligence from an ally that Saddam was trying to obtain yellow cake uranium in Africa, the evidence was a forged document from Italy. I think it was channeled through the British. OSP in the Pentagon piped the forgery directly to the White House. CIA had determined that the document was an obvious forgery, and directly warned the White House not to use it. When asked later why they used the forgery in spite of the CIA warning, a WH official said they forgot about the CIA warning. The WH did not investigate or prosecute the forgery, they used the forgery in the President's speech and then said they forgot it was a forgery.

Right. But if I remember correctly, there were foreign intelligent services that believed Saddam has chemical/biological weapons.

 

[Vol Main]

Right. But if I remember correctly, there were foreign intelligent services that believed Saddam has chemical/biological weapons.

Are you referring to Germany's BND?

 

[Vol Main]

I don't know about war crimes...but they certainly should have been charged with murder, fraud and racketeering.

Good post. Welcome to VN...don't let the flamers get you down.

 

[volinbham]

Sheeesh back at you. Why do you imply that Americans should not form opinions about a political issue and talk about it unless it has been decided in a court trial, or that we should only agree with the outcome of a court trial? How wrong is that? There is no court trial, so stop all discussion...let a government rule without questioning or speaking? How wrong is that? Why do you suggest that journalistic and historical research cannot offer sufficient "mounds of evidence" for valid opinions? Do you really believe that? There are in fact "mounds of evidence" which I as a citizen am privy to know and weigh and judge. Your being without knowledge of that evidence in no way determines mine. That is why I ripped you. Your replies seem falsely dismissive on their face, with the condescending attitude of a flippantly self satisfied dilettante. You might be strong on some topics, but so far this is not one of them. jmo

Oh Dear Lord - you've gotten all pissy about one comment I made.

I've never said you cannot have (nor anyone else) have an opinion.

I was pointing out that in on breath you bemoaned the W admin violating the Constitution then went ahead and violated the Constitution in spirit by determining guilt without proper due diligence. Somehow that sent you into a tizzy about being disrespected for all the research you've done.

If you recall, all this began because I simply questioned the letter's author contention that 100s of thousands of Iraq vets agreed with his criminal accusations. You chose to respond to that and I tried to explain my position. You could have left it alone yet you went down the tangent and got your panties into a wad about it based on some weird interpretations of my comments and my character. Then you played the ignore card and whined about how much of you day had been wasted. It was quite the spectacle. Throughout it you insulted my character repeatedly yet whined about "silly insults".

If my posts are causing such mental stress and anguish for you I suggest you return me to your ever growing ignore list.

 

[Vol Main]

Oh Dear Lord - you've gotten all pissy about one comment I made.

I've never said you cannot have (nor anyone else) have an opinion.

I was pointing out that in on breath you bemoaned the W admin violating the Constitution then went ahead and violated the Constitution in spirit by determining guilt without proper due diligence. Somehow that sent you into a tizzy about being disrespected for all the research you've done.

If you recall, all this began because I simply questioned the letter's author contention that 100s of thousands of Iraq vets agreed with his criminal accusations. You chose to respond to that and I tried to explain my position. You could have left it alone yet you went down the tangent and got your panties into a wad about it based on some weird interpretations of my comments and my character. Then you played the ignore card and whined about how much of you day had been wasted. It was quite the spectacle. Throughout it you insulted my character repeatedly yet whined about "silly insults".

If my posts are causing such mental stress and anguish for you I suggest you return me to your ever growing ignore list.

...and miss posts like this?

 

[DC_Vol]

Great post. Sure, that's fine.