Bush planned Iraq attack before 9/11 _

[OhioMSPinNJ]

I guess, now I'd consider them a terrorist organization with a threat to U.S. troops in Iraq. But before the war, they meant nothing to us. It still seems to me like we created a terrorist problem in Iraq for ourselves by going to war with Iraq... U.S. soldiers would not have to worry about the Fedayeen (equally confused on spelling ) had they not invaded that country. The Fedayeen had nothing to do with 9/11. There still is no proof that Iraq was housing terrorists.

If your point is that the Fedayeen were terrorists, and being housed. I guess you are technically correct. But I guess we can start calling a lot of types of people terrorists nowadays. The term is getting overly misused. My point still stands that the pre-war allegations that there were known Al-Queda ties have never been proven. This and WMDs were the two main reasons for going over there. They have not yet been proven, and IMO will never be. After the public realized this, it became a humanitarian mission.

As I said before, I hope the U.S. doesn't **** up like they normally do and leave Iraq in utter chaos.

Chris

The Fedayeen are (as taken from cfr.org)...
In addition to organizing smuggling and other illegal efforts along Iraqs borders, the group is thought to be directly responsible for some of the regimes most brutal acts. It is widely reported to operate a death squad that conducts extra-judicial executions. The U.S. State Department, for example, accuses the Fedayeen of beheading more than 200 women as part of an alleged anti-prostitution campaign. Some of the families of the victims were forced to display the heads outside their homes. Many of the victims were not engaged in prostitution, but were targeted for political reasons, according to a March 20 State Department report.

Looks like a mafia organization, that uses TERRORIST type tactics on the US forces.

To state that they were not a threat to the US prior to the war, IMO, is untrue. If these individuals are as ruthless as they are to there own people, and are by beliefs, anti-American; how long until the committed terrorist attacks on America and its assets abroad, pre-Iraqi Freedom? Al-qaeda, was not a household name prior to 9-11; but look at them now. Who is to say that the same fedayeen soldiers/terrorists would not have eventually committed a similar attack?

I for one, am glad GW Bush took the war to Saddam and his regime and overthrew them. I am sure everyone has heard the phrase "History repeats itself." Well looking back on history infamous names like Hitler, Moussalini, Stalin, etc. all come to mind, and Saddam Hussein fits right in with those names, fortunately for future America, Bush had the balls to remove him before he could wreak more havoc than he already has.

 

[rktktpaul]

I have no issues regarding military action provided the reasons are valid. I don't think that they were clearly established in this action, unlike Afghanistan which was very clear cut.

To me the motive became very clear. In his first public statement regarding seeking military action in Iraq through the UN, our current President Bush invoked the planned assasination of his father by Iraqi operatives during a visit to Kuwait by the former President as a character reference for Hussein. At that point it seemed to me that it became a personal vendetta.

 

[matallama]

To me the motive became very clear. In his first public statement regarding seeking military action in Iraq through the UN, our current President Bush invoked the planned assasination of his father by Iraqi operatives during a visit to Kuwait by the former President as a character reference for Hussein. At that point it seemed to me that it became a personal vendetta.

(werd) Ding ding ding - you win the prize! Bush Jr was out to get Saddam all along because of not only the planned assassination, but because Saddam Hussein remained in power after the Gulf War, making Bush Sr look bad. Not to mention that Bush Sr won a war against Iraq and failed to get re-elected.

I figured all along that Jr had decided even before taking office that he was going to get Saddam. He just had to find some lame excuse to do it, and now the truth is coming out, though some people are still going to refuse to believe it.

 

[70]

(werd) Ding ding ding - you win the prize! Bush Jr was out to get Saddam all along because of not only the planned assassination, but because Saddam Hussein remained in power after the Gulf War, making Bush Sr look bad. Not to mention that Bush Sr won a war against Iraq and failed to get re-elected.

I figured all along that Jr had decided even before taking office that he was going to get Saddam. He just had to find some lame excuse to do it, and now the truth is coming out, though some people are still going to refuse to believe it.

It could be a retaliation. Or it could be carrying out a policy that was written in 1998 by the Clinton Administration.

It's hard to say. The Gulf War didn't make Bush Sr. look bad. That conflict did what it was intended to do. Get Saddam out of Kuwait. Bush Sr. wanted to continue on. The UN stepped in and said no.

The UN made themsleves look bad by doing that. Which lead us to the present day situation.

 

[girth]

Paul O'Neill is a pussy that just wants to sell his book. If what he claims is true WTF didn't he bring it up earlier?

 

[mspdfreak]

I swear to God, some of you are so uninformed it makes me weep for the future. You obviously didn't hear the whole story.
Former Sec. O'Neill said that plans for a regime change in Iraq were on the table before 9/11. That's correct, and that's all most of the liberal media chose to release. What you obviously didn't hear was that those plans were also on the desk of Bill Clinton. In fact, I thought it was common knowledge that post regime-change plans are and have been on presidents' desks for years regarding several countries...Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, N. Korea, Bosnia, China...etc. And these plans you are calling "Dubya's war plans" have nothing to do with war at all. They are mostly boring economic and political possibilities following a regime change regardless of how it comes about. Jesus, people...it's called information. Look into it!

 

[PhreakV]

but what O'Neill (former permanent member of NSC) also said was that Curious George actually came out and said, "Find a way to get this done..." Sept. 11th and the overhyped "terrorism and biological weapons" (I guess that's thanks to the 'liberal' media) that resulted were therefore 'just cause' to get it done...

yes the plans were there for many years but Doofy completely changed the course of western civilization when he, and Daddy's friends, decided that the US 'has' the power to pre-emptively strike other sovereign nations...

 

[shinzen]

There is also a big difference between political and economic sanctions and outright war, which is what O'Neill claimed was what shrub wanted.

 

[shinzen]

The search for WMD is still on. The Dutch found some mortar shells containing chemical weapons, "supposedly."

The war in Iraq is not a sham. To say that means the people who have died over there was for no reason what-so-ever...

I was there. I did Mortuary Affairs. I saw the dead up close and personal, and sent them home.

If you enlist in today's military, specifically the Army or the Marine Corps, you should expect to be sent over-seas. Active duty personal have been deployed more often to more places since the Clinton administration than ever before.

By going to a foreign country with the intent of doing anything military in nature, you should expect that you will get shot at. A natural consequence of getting shot is death.

If you can't deal with that, then you should not enlist in today's military. It is your choice. If you enlist in today's military and then whine about being sent over-seas for some conflict, then you should not have enlisted in the first place.

The people who died in Operation Iraqi Freedom died for this country...And I am proud to have served with them while I was there. And I am proud that I was given the opportunity to make sure they were sent home...

I am very proud of our armed forces, I never claimed that I wasn't. I am not proud of what they are being sent to do. The people that have died over in Iraq did not die defending our country, which is the purpose of the military. The point here about the sham is that bush was looking for a reason to invade Iraq, had his advisors create a way, and went in. There are no links to Al-Quaida, there have not been any WMD's found- Qualify "some" mortar shells- did they find 2 or 3 that had traces of some agent, or did they find a cache of thousands. "Some" with traces could be anything.

 

[Micah]

www.google.com

"miserable failure"

put that in and click "I'm feeling lucky"

'nuff said bub

 

[Mazdaspeedgirl]

I found this interesting...

http://www.the-movement.com/menu/weird_coincidences.htm

 

[Notorious]

Whatever, saddam is gone. Of course bush planned it, I say good for him and good for the people of Iraq.

 

[Mazdaspeedgirl]

http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

Read the 1st paragraph on page 51 about "the process of transformation". Keep in mind this was published one year before 9-11.

 

[sundevilMP5]

i don't have time to read all the responses or even all of the original post but...a long time ago there was a dateline on about this...

they interviewed several of bush's administrators and staff...and admitted that bush did want to go after saddam before 9/11...and right after 9/11...but his administrators told him it would be stupid to go after sadam and osama at the same time...that he would lose his support if he went after saddam...but bush seemed to have his mind made up about saddam and look at where we were a year later...

 

[70]

There is also a big difference between political and economic sanctions and outright war, which is what O'Neill claimed was what shrub wanted.

Yeah, and what is wrong with that?

The political and economic sanctions were working so well weren't they?

No, they weren't.

And no one has addressed why our troops found chemicals that had been tagged by UN inspectors for disposal? Why didn't Saddam have them disposed of? Hmmm...

 

[70]

I am very proud of our armed forces, I never claimed that I wasn't. I am not proud of what they are being sent to do. The people that have died over in Iraq did not die defending our country, which is the purpose of the military. The point here about the sham is that bush was looking for a reason to invade Iraq, had his advisors create a way, and went in. There are no links to Al-Quaida, there have not been any WMD's found- Qualify "some" mortar shells- did they find 2 or 3 that had traces of some agent, or did they find a cache of thousands. "Some" with traces could be anything.

I posted the link to the story in another thread, but they found, I think, a twelve shell stash of 120mm mortar rounds specifically designed to deploy chemcial weapons. The rounds also had what intial tests showed to be chemical agents in them.

They were thought to have been used in the Iran and Iraq war.

The point here is, this is one small portion found BURIED! How much desert is there in Iraq? How much square mileage is there for Saddam to have had weapons buried?

It takes a long time to find that stuff, and it doesn't help when you get teased by terrorist factions there.

They found a few planes and a couple helicopters buried around various airfields while I was there. And it was thought that Saddam's Air Force was completely wiped out in the Gulf War...

Do see what I'm getting at now?

I went on a few small convoys looking for some of the mass graves from the Gulf War where the locals told us about weapons caches that were buried on their land back after the Gulf War. Weaposn cahces of AKs and swords and bayonets...

Who's to say there aren't the same caches all over the place of WMD?

 

[shinzen]

Yeah, and what is wrong with that?

The political and economic sanctions were working so well weren't they?

No, they weren't.

And no one has addressed why our troops found chemicals that had been tagged by UN inspectors for disposal? Why didn't Saddam have them disposed of? Hmmm...

Hmm. Whats wrong with war without just cause? If you don't know, then I can't explain it to you. If you don't value human life, I don't even know what to say.
Where is the article about chemicals that were tagged for disposal? What were they? Why isn't it all over the news? Or are they not chemical weapons...

 

[shinzen]

I posted the link to the story in another thread, but they found, I think, a twelve shell stash of 120mm mortar rounds specifically designed to deploy chemcial weapons. The rounds also had what intial tests showed to be chemical agents in them.

They were thought to have been used in the Iran and Iraq war.

The point here is, this is one small portion found BURIED! How much desert is there in Iraq? How much square mileage is there for Saddam to have had weapons buried?

It takes a long time to find that stuff, and it doesn't help when you get teased by terrorist factions there.

They found a few planes and a couple helicopters buried around various airfields while I was there. And it was thought that Saddam's Air Force was completely wiped out in the Gulf War...

Do see what I'm getting at now?



I went on a few small convoys looking for some of the mass graves from the Gulf War where the locals told us about weapons caches that were buried on their land back after the Gulf War. Weaposn cahces of AKs and swords and bayonets...

Who's to say there aren't the same caches all over the place of WMD?

So if this was a stash, why were there only 12? It wouldn't make much sense to have 1000 sites with 12 rockets each, it would take forever to get a usable amount found and loaded- And traces of chemicals from the Iran-Iraq war? Do you really think that qualifies as WMD's? Where are the agents? Where is the actual chemicals used in them?
You found a few planes and helicopters? Were they loaded with chemical or biological weapons? Did the AK's have chemical rounds? Last time I checked, no country is prohibited from having swords or bayonets, unless you really think that those are a threat to the U.S.

Sounds to me like you are reaching pretty far on this.

 

[808*MP5]

reguardless of how you feel about President Bush or his actions, EVERY AMERICAN needs to do one thing.....

SUPPORT OUR TROOPS!

They follow orders reguardless of their personnal feelings about the situation, that is their job. They took an oath or swore to follow the orders of the people appointed over them, and at the top of that chain is...........The President of the United States.

Not just my opinion....my duty, as well as yours.

 

[shinzen]

I agree- read above posts. But your views, positive or negative about what our troops are being sent to do are a different animal altogether. And there is a big difference between following orders and agreeing with them or following them blindly-