The New Pentagon Papers -reasons for war on Iraq, false by design

[*d*]

A high-ranking military officer reveals how US Defense Department extremists suppressed information and twisted the truth to drive the US to war with Iraq.

The New Pentagon Papers -by Karen Kwiatkowski, staff officer for the secretary of defense, undersecretary for policy, sub-Saharan Africa and volunteer for the Near East South Asia directorate (NESA). Kwiatkowski observed firsthand the formation of the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans, May'02 to Feb'03.

www.masnet.org/articleinterest.asp?id=1036
"War is generally crafted and pursued for political reasons, but the reasons given to the Congress and to the American people for this one were inaccurate and so misleading as to be false. Moreover, they were false by design. Certainly, the neoconservatives never bothered to sell the rest of the country on the real reasons for occupation of Iraq -- more bases from which to flex U.S. muscle with Syria and Iran, and better positioning for the inevitable fall of the regional ruling sheikdoms. Maintaining OPEC on a dollar track and not a euro and fulfilling a half-baked imperial vision also played a role. These more accurate reasons for invading and occupying could have been argued on their merits -- an angry and aggressive U.S. population might indeed have supported the war and occupation for those reasons. But Americans didn't get the chance for an honest debate."

 

[EnergizerBunny]

"War is generally crafted and pursued for political reasons, but the reasons given to the Congress and to the American people for this one were inaccurate and so misleading as to be false. Moreover, they were false by design. Certainly, the neoconservatives never bothered to sell the rest of the country on the real reasons for occupation of Iraq -- more bases from which to flex U.S. muscle with Syria and Iran, and better positioning for the inevitable fall of the regional ruling sheikdoms. Maintaining OPEC on a dollar track and not a euro and fulfilling a half-baked imperial vision also played a role. These more accurate reasons for invading and occupying could have been argued on their merits -- an angry and aggressive U.S. population might indeed have supported the war and occupation for those reasons. But Americans didn't get the chance for an honest debate."

Hear. Hear. And who could really blame the Americans for pursuing their own interests? We (other countries) might not like it because we don't enjoy the same position of power. But then at least we could also say that, like it is.

 

[ocean976124]

Certainly, the neoconservatives never bothered to sell the rest of the country on the real reasons for occupation of Iraq -- more bases from which to flex U.S. muscle with Syria and Iran, and better positioning for the inevitable fall of the regional ruling sheikdoms. Maintaining OPEC on a dollar track and not a euro and fulfilling a half-baked imperial vision also played a role. These more accurate reasons for invading and occupying could have been argued on their merits -- an angry and aggressive U.S. population might indeed have supported the war and occupation for those reasons. But Americans didn't get the chance for an honest debate."

LOL, obviously you have not been in America for the past 2 years. All of these reasons have been discussed in debates on the TV, radio, and newspapers...

 

[papasmerf]

Re: Re: The New Pentagon Papers -reasons for war on Iraq, false by design

LOL, obviously you have not been in America for the past 2 years. All of these reasons have been discussed in debates on the TV, radio, and newspapers...

In an effort to belittle and condem an entire nation. Facts such as this is not relevant.

 

[*d*]

Re: Re: The New Pentagon Papers -reasons for war on Iraq, false by design

LOL, obviously you have not been in America for the past 2 years. All of these reasons have been discussed in debates on the TV, radio, and newspapers...

Don't give me BS! The majority, if not 90%, of the US population has never heard any other issues on the reasons to go to war accept WMD and terrorism.

 

[papasmerf]

Re: Re: Re: The New Pentagon Papers -reasons for war on Iraq, false by design

Don't give me BS! The majority, if not 90%, of the US population has never heard any other issues on the reasons to go to war accept WMD and terrorism.

Sorry but I am in the 90% or the masses.

And I have been bombarded with this for months.

 

[n_v]

A high-ranking military officer reveals how US Defense Department extremists suppressed information and twisted the truth to drive the US to war ...

And someone is surprised? Par for the course in US politics.

All of these reasons have been discussed in debates on the TV, radio, and newspapers...

If you honestly believe this then you really are one naive guy.

 

[*d*]

Re: Re: Re: Re: The New Pentagon Papers -reasons for war on Iraq, false by design

Sorry but I am in the 90% or the masses.

And I have been bombarded with this for months.

Could you give me a link to any US government press release that discusses other reasons to go to war besides WMD, potential terrorism and oh yes, Saddam is evil?

 

[*d*]

The following is the 'other'(real) reasons for war that Karen Kwiatkowski picked up from working at the Pentagon.
-from an L.A.Weekly interview with Kwiatkowski in Feb'04 --

"One of those reasons is that sanctions and containment were working and everybody pretty much knew it. Many companies around the world were preparing to do business with Iraq in anticipation of a lifting of sanctions. But the U.S. and the U.K. had been bombing northern and southern Iraq since 1991. So it was very unlikely that we would be in any kind of position to gain significant contracts in any post-sanctions Iraq. And those sanctions were going to be lifted soon, Saddam would still be in place, and we would get no financial benefit.

The second reason has to do with our military-basing posture in the region. We had been very dissatisfied with our relations with Saudi Arabia, particularly the restrictions on our basing. And also there was dissatisfaction from the people of Saudi Arabia. So we were looking for alternate strategic locations beyond Kuwait, beyond Qatar, to secure something we had been searching for since the days of Carter — to secure the energy lines of communication in the region. Bases in Iraq, then, were very important — that is, if you hold that is America’s role in the world. Saddam Hussein was not about to invite us in.

The last reason is the conversion, the switch Saddam Hussein made in the Food for Oil program, from the dollar to the euro. He did this, by the way, long before 9/11, in November 2000 — selling his oil for euros. The oil sales permitted in that program aren’t very much. But when the sanctions would be lifted, the sales from the country with the second largest oil reserves on the planet would have been moving to the euro.

The U.S. dollar is in a sensitive period because we are a debtor nation now. Our currency is still popular, but it’s not backed up like it used to be. If oil, a very solid commodity, is traded on the euro, that could cause massive, almost glacial, shifts in confidence in trading on the dollar. So one of the first executive orders that Bush signed in May [2003] switched trading on Iraq’s oil back to the dollar."

 

[loaded]

Funny, how we live in a world where we get more factual information from TERB than from CNN ??$#%#$#& Policy: keep people in the dark ???

 

[EnergizerBunny]

Now we are talking ...

"... The U.S. dollar is in a sensitive period because we are a debtor nation now. Our currency is still popular, but it’s not backed up like it used to be. If oil, a very solid commodity, is traded on the euro, that could cause massive, almost glacial, shifts in confidence in trading on the dollar. So one of the first executive orders that Bush signed in May [2003] switched trading on Iraq’s oil back to the dollar."

This is a VERY important issue. And the American people should take this issue very seriously. OPEC still threatens to do this switch in oil valuation from US$ to Euros.

Let's face it, energy is vital to any economy. The economy is vital to power. If Russia or China had a better economy, do you think that they would have a greater position of power in the world?

Americans live as well as they do because other countries do not live as well.

It is in the interest of all Americans who wish to have a very high standard of living (copious consumption) to back their government in it's power play around the world.

"... So it was very unlikely that we would be in any kind of position to gain significant contracts in any post-sanctions Iraq.

The second reason has to do with our military-basing posture in the region. We had been very dissatisfied with our relations with Saudi Arabia, particularly the restrictions on our basing. And also there was dissatisfaction from the people of Saudi Arabia. So we were looking for alternate strategic locations beyond Kuwait, beyond Qatar, to secure something we had been searching for since the days of Carter — to secure the energy lines of communication in the region. Bases in Iraq, then, were very important — that is, if you hold that is America’s role in the world. Saddam Hussein was not about to invite us in.

The last reason is the conversion, the switch Saddam Hussein made in the Food for Oil program, from the dollar to the euro. He did this, by the way, long before 9/11, in November 2000 — selling his oil for euros. The oil sales permitted in that program aren’t very much. But when the sanctions would be lifted, the sales from the country with the second largest oil reserves on the planet would have been moving to the euro."

If only the neo-cons would have been able to have been more diplomatic and wily in their maneuvering. That is where they lack big time; they are like a bull in a china shop and think that everyone is stupid and will buy their simplistic bullshit.

 

[ocean976124]

Re: Re: Re: The New Pentagon Papers -reasons for war on Iraq, false by design

Don't give me BS! The majority, if not 90%, of the US population has never heard any other issues on the reasons to go to war accept WMD and terrorism.

Well, I live in the USA and I enjoy news. Thus I read political commentary whenever I can, listen to talk radio, and watch the news stations. I've heard those reasons discussed many times. In fact, I've even used some of those in the debates in the Terb lounge discussions.
Any US citizen who pays attention to the news has heard these issues addressed both pro and con...

 

[ocean976124]

Re: Re: The New Pentagon Papers -reasons for war on Iraq, false by design

If you honestly believe this then you really are one naive guy.

It has nothing to do with what I "believe" it has to do with what I, myself, have seen, heard, and read...
As I said in my post to *d* I have even used some of those arguments right here on Terb over the past year. I have said several times right here on Terb that I believe installing a democracy right between Iran and Syria is one of the reaons for going to war and that we'd then most likely have military bases in a perfect position for when either of those two terrorist supporting nations steps too far out of line...

 

[ocean976124]

Re: Re: Re: The New Pentagon Papers -reasons for war on Iraq, false by design

I"ve spent a lot of time in the U.S. in the past couple of years and don't think I once heard any of this sort of debate in the U.S. unless it was the alterntive media discussing what they believed the "real" reason behind the desire for war was.

Did the mainstream media ever spend any real time discussing these things? No. Were these arguments ever part of the political debate? Hardly.

You won't get real issues discussed at a newsdesk. Usually its the "round table discussion" programs that bring these issues to light. Of course doing a little bit of reading and taking an interest in your nation's affairs also helps.
What is naive is to think that news broadcasts dedicated to quick soundbites is going to give you the real story on anything. The internet is a wonderful thing, if you see an issue that interests you then you go to the internet and the whole nation's newspapers and editorials and commentaries are at your fingertips.
To be outraged that the whole story wasn't given in a 30-minute news cast or that the government is emphasizing certain elements over others is to be really naive. Politics and mainstream news have always worked pretty much the same way. People are only outraged when it works against something they want but they ignore it when it suits their interests...

 

[EnergizerBunny]

People are only outraged when it works against something they want but they ignore it when it suits their interests...

EXACTLY...human nature at it's finest.

 

[*d*]

Re: Re: Re: Re: The New Pentagon Papers -reasons for war on Iraq, false by design

Well, I live in the USA and I enjoy news. Thus I read political commentary whenever I can, listen to talk radio, and watch the news stations. I've heard those reasons discussed many times. In fact, I've even used some of those in the debates in the Terb lounge discussions.
Any US citizen who pays attention to the news has heard these issues addressed both pro and con...

The problem is, if the news is not mainstream, most people will just dismiss it. I too have been voicing these reasons on terb leading up to the war, and most(not all)disputers dismissed me as anti-American or just a conspiracy theorist. They never took those kind of reasons too seriously. But what's happening now is that the mainstream reasons for war, the official US government released reasons, are not panning out. And the 'other' reasons, such as the ones Kwiatkowski has stated, are becoming more relevant. Especially with Bush's executive orders 13290(the confiscation of Iraqi bank and national financial assets, including assets of the oil ministry), 13303(giving the US the job as new administrator of the Iraqi Development Fund and all future oil sales that would feed it) and 13315(taking all Iraqi state owned property out of the hands of Iraqis and placing it in the Development Fund for any use that the US bias administrator sees fit).

 

[*d*]

Re: Now we are talking ...

It is in the interest of all Americans who wish to have a very high standard of living (copious consumption) to back their government in it's power play around the world.

You are more honest than most. However I believe the majority of the American public is too humane to allow their government to bully the world openly. They allow it to happen now only because they've been lead to believe that their government is doing the right thing for the betterment of the world, and not just for the betterment of corporate America.