"I knew what would happen if people thought we were developing a potential war plan for Iraq," Bush is quoted as telling Woodward. "It was such a high-stakes moment and ... it would look like that I was anxious to go to war. And I'm not anxious to go to war." Woodward says Bush pulled Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld aside Nov. 21, 2001 â when U.S. forces and allies were in control of about half of Afghanistan â and asked him what kind of war plan he had on Iraq. When Rumsfeld said it was outdated, Bush told him to get started on a fresh one. :eek: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm.../20040416/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_woodward_book_3
If in fact, as Bush said in his speech the other night that we are in Iraq because we are interested in spreading DEMOCRACY throughout that region, what are the limits of that policy, and how do we choose which regions are a priority? Bush no longer talks about WMD. In fact, we haven't heard a peep out of him in this regard. But if in fact we are to believe that his interest in spreading DEMOCRACY is genuine, than why aren't we in North Korea or Iran trying to spread DEMOCRACY?
Maverick74 Elite Member Registered: Mar 2002 Posts: 2267 My question Waggie, come on dude, we are in private now, please don't tell me you lied on a public message board. I have 4 guys PMing me that you have never been married in your life. Now we may disagree on policy issues but I never thought of you as a liar until now. If you are, this is quite a dissapointment. You know that I go after everyone on ET that I feel is not straight up with everyone and I take no prisoners. And it doesn't matter if they are republicans or democrats, I treat them the same. If someone is full of shit, I call them on it, plain and simple. Now I have your name so I guess if I wanted to, I could get your court records in the Bay area and find out and publish that here on ET. But do you really want me to do that? Just answer the question and we'll put this behind us. You can publish this PM on the message boards like you do with all the others, I really don't care. Mav __________________ "Of all the gin joints in all the towns in all the world, she walks into mine." Rick Blaine
Waggie, I think you are the one that is obsessed. Are you going to post my PM's to you on every single thread? I mean, don't get me wrong, I don't mind. I just didn't want to keep embarassing you in public. I figured it might be easier for you if I did it in private, but your choice, that's cool. LOL. BTW, I still have not gotten a response yet.
Woodward states that Bush quietly ordered a creation of a war plan against Iraq just 72 days after 911. Woodward also states that Secretary of State Colin Powell was staunchly against the war, and that he felt that Cheney was developing an "unhealthy fixatoin" on trying to find a connection between Iraq and the 911 terrorist attacks. The relationship between Powell and Cheney became so bad that they rarely even speak to each other. Bush told Rumsfeld to keep quiet about the war plan, and as a result NSA Condoleezza Rice and CIA Director George Tenet were kept in the dark until the last minute. General Tommy Franks, who was in charge of the Afghan war apparently uttered a string of obscenities when the Pentagon told him to come up with an Iraq war plan in the midst of fighting another conflict. On December 21st, 2002 George Tenet and John McLaughlin ( the CIA's second in command ) had a meeting with President Bush to assure Bush that Iraq possessed WMD. After showing Bush "flip-charts" of various satellite photos and images, Bush remarked that the photos were "not gripping enough, not compelling enough" and that the presentation was a flop. Bush asks, "Is this all we got?" And is obviously unimpressed . . . stating that these photos were not going to be enough to sell the American public on an invasion of Iraq. Tenet then replied, " Don't worry . . . it's a slam-dunk case." Bush challenged Tenet one more time, and Tenet again responded that "It's a slam-dunk."
Can't wait for "60 Minutes" on Sunday night. Even Joeseph Goebbells, I mean Karl Rove now admits that the Mission Accomplished photo-op on the flight deck of the aircraft carrier last May was "regrettable"
"In the Summer of 2002, Bush approved $700 million worth of "prepatory tasks" in the Persian Gulf region such as upgrading airfields, bases, fuel pipelines and munitions storage depots to accommodate a massive U.S. troop deployment. The Administration funded the projects from a supplemental appropriations bill for the war in Afghanistan and old appropriations, keeping Congress unaware of the reprogramming of money and the eventual cost."
Saddam was a complete POS and deserved to have a cruise missle shoved up his ass. But at this point, does anyone seriously think we're in Iraq for more than three reasons: 1. Saaadum tried to get a hit done on GW's old man. A good enough reason to charter the CIA to whack Hussein and Sons, but a full invasion is just a teeny bit overkill. Of course, the CIA had always been iffy about that and thanks to 8 years of the prior administration's and Congress's stupidity, they'd become about as useless as a man at a lesbian convention. 2. Hussein had threatened to price Iraqi oil in Euros and if ever released from UN sanctions was going to try to get other Arab nations to go along with him (arguing that since the US blindly supports anything Israel does, doing everything possible to affect the US was also a blow to Israel - same logic terrorist use and Israel keeps giving them plenty of recruiting material). A broadbased switch switch to Euros would be detrimental to the US. 3. The UN food for oil program was an enormous farce lining the pockets of the French and Russians (and apparently Koffe Annan's son) and was pumping dough into Hussein's coffers. And since we don't like the French (at least the a-holes heading their government anyway), an Iraq invasion had the bonus of slapping them around in the process - you didn't think the French voted against invading Iraq out of morality did you??
"You break it . . . You own it!" Secretary of State Colin Powell and Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage's policy on Iraq. "You are going to be the proud owner of 25 million people," Powell is said to have told Bush in the summer of 2002. "You will own all their hopes, aspirations and problems. You'll own it all."