Thread: Why America Went to War with Iraq

Red, I agree with your assessment, with one caveat, AlQeada are Sunni muslims, but they follow a strict form of Sunni along the lines of Wahabi. Hussein was a Sunni, as well as a majority of the Baath party. Although they did share the same religion, the Baath party was very secular in nature whereas AlQaeda are driven by fundamentalist religion. They were enemies nonetheless, this is why they didn't cooperate togetether, because Hussein was power hungry and paranoiud (rightfully so, in this case), and Bin Laden wanted to rid Iraq of it's secular rulers, so naturally Hussein didn't want to have to deal with him. And besides that, Bin Laden offered his services to the Saudis to topple Hussein.......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabi
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baath

Originally Posted by MotoZ

Originally Posted by MotoZ

.
.
.
Think about it. George Bush is humming the tune that is in his head. Don't you do the same when you hum or talk to your friends? You speak your heart, right?

Here's the truth. We went into Iraq to spread democracy and free the Iraqi people. That's what George Bush says because that is the song in his head.
.
.
.

Condaleeza confirmed it a few months ago. Now Cheney has confirmed it, too.

Cheney said on CNN's "State of the Union with John King": "We have succeeded in creating, in the heart of the Middle East, a democratically governed Iraq. And that's a big deal. And that is, in fact, what we set out to do."

The easiest way to throw people of the right trail is to give them what they expect to see or hear. If you see a suspect park their car in a garage with an automatic garage door, and you lose sight of the suspect for a few minutes, then the garage door opens and the car suddenly takes off down the street...you expect the suspect to be in the car and must give chase if you're supposed to be tailing them.

That is not in fact what they set out to do in the first place, they set out to get revenge, and they wanted all their ducks in a row. You don't honestly believe that they went to the UN and told Nato that they just wanted to invade a non-democratic country and make it democratic...do you And, if you do, you don't honestly believe that the UN and Nato said, 'Sure! Go right ahead, we're gonna muster all the countries in the world that agree with you and back y'all up!'

Do you

Originally Posted by MaBell37

The easiest way to throw people of the right trail is to give them what they expect to see or hear. If you see a suspect park their car in a garage with an automatic garage door, and you lose sight of the suspect for a few minutes, then the garage door opens and the car suddenly takes off down the street...you expect the suspect to be in the car and must give chase if you're supposed to be tailing them.

That is not in fact what they set out to do in the first place, they set out to get revenge, and they wanted all their ducks in a row. You don't honestly believe that they went to the UN and told Nato that they just wanted to invade a non-democratic country and make it democratic...do you And, if you do, you don't honestly believe that the UN and Nato said, 'Sure! Go right ahead, we're gonna muster all the countries in the world that agree with you and back y'all up!'

Do you

Correct, I don't believe that at the beginning they really told anyone why they went into Iraq. What I do believe is that the WMD story is what they told everyone, but that story was pretext. The real reason was undisclosed, which was to plant a democracy seed in the middle east. Iraq was the easiest nation to rationalize given our recent history with them, i.e. Iraq I, and Saddam's low political capital.

At the beginning of this thread is a speech by Francis Fukuyama. Mr. Fukuyama is a renowned political philosopher and was an intellectual leader of the neoconservative movement. He was an inspiration to many neocons - their Rush Limbaugh if you will. In that capacity he was a founding member of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), which is a neoconservative think tank that advocated, among other things, removing Saddam Hussein from power (but not necessarily introducing democracy to Iraq). Wolfowitz, Cheney, and Rumsfeld were also co-founders and fans of Fukuyama's thinking.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/st...principles.htm

Prior to co-founding PNAC, Fukuyama also wrote a book entitled "The End of History and the Last Man". In that book he professed that capitalist democracy is the best and final form of government. As evidence he showed that through the course of history nations have increasingly turned to democracy as a form of government. Very few abandonded democracy to return to something else such as aristocracy, communism, etc.

When we went into Iraq, Fukuyama resigned from PNAC and said that Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, etc. were the worst students that he had. In a nutshell, his position was that those students misinterpreted his teaching and instead were trying to force-feed democracy into the middle east. Fukuyama's teaching never professed that such a tactic would work. Instead, his teachings professed that democracy had to be chosen by the people as a means to rule themselves. Forcing democracy on them won't work as their societal structures, e.g. their societal institutions, would not support democracy.

So, in summary, my belief is that Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz had an unwritten plan to force-feed democracy into Iraq. Their intentions were good, but Fukuyama says that it won't work. My belief is also that Bush went along with the plan but not from a political philosophy standpoint. Instead, I think Bush went along from a spiritual standpoint. Again, good intentions but perhaps misguided or misaligned with God's will.

Will democracy in Iraq survive and catch on throughout the middle east? I don't know. But I'm now convinced that that was the unwritten plan all along.

Here is the book that Fukuyama wrote when he resigned from PNAC.

http://www.amazon.com/America-Crossr...ref=pd_sim_b_2

Aww, geez, there's that, 'must be God' answer again.

Well written aka Moto. Seems that you make some very interesting points, albeit, you also make some unqualified conclusions.

First, you're giving credit to a government to come up with this elaborate scheme to force feed democracy down anyone's throat. How and when did they come up with this complicated plan? Where, in world events, was the catalyst for this plan? Or was the plan just supposed to take off on its own? If it needed a catalyst, and one wasn't available, were they just going to provide their own to kick off their plan? Was the attack on September 11th really initiated by our government and everything referring to it is all made up just to support us invading Iraq? Please.

If this plan were in the works for a long time (and it had to have been, otherwise, we would have caught whiff of a sloppy, poorly thought out plan such as this long ago) don't you think that by now, somebody would have leaked it out somehow, somewhere? This country's history with keeping secrets has been a tumultuous one at best. Somebody, somewhere, has always felt they were getting the short end of some stick and decided they were gonna leak something to the press as payback. You mean to tell me that this government has finally succeeded in keeping everyone happy enough to keep their damn mouths shut for this long about something this big? Please. Never happen, not in this country.





Second. With as long as they would have taken to plan all this, it would have had to been written down, at least in part, by someone, somewhere. Yet, there's not a single scent as to the existence of such documentation, anywhere, by anyone. Again, amazing that our government can keep anything secret, much less for this amount of time, with no leaks, paper trails, or any other evidence even being alluded to over the span of decades.





Third. You mentioned, "...In a nutshell...", did Fukuyama say that in so many words or more/less? Or is this just a self drawn conclusion by you? If he said it in the book, does that mean I have to go buy a book and read it cover to cover to adequately reply to a forum post on the internet? Please. If it is a self drawn conclusion by you, do you have facts to back it up, or just your own theory(pl?)?





Bottom line, I agree with you that you can't force a horse to drink water, all you can do is lead the horse to the water and hope and pray that it has the common sense to drink before it dies of thirst. What I don't agree with you about, is that this was some supremely secret all-powerful plan that was created and kept secret for so long without anyone finding out about it, in any way, ever. JFK's assasination is a secret, but it is a well known secret. Just about everyone in the world knows that our government has a full investigation that reveals all kinds of secrets, tucked away somewhere in some dark place, highly classified til kingdom come. The information that can prove whatever, however, itself may be a secret, but it's existence isn't.

At the same time, I also believe that the WMD story was a crock of shit. It was abundantly obvious that Hussein had em, hell he was throwing them around like they were rocks. But I still firmly believe that the reason we went in there in the first place was because that's where the terrorist organization, that attacked us on September 11th, was tracked to. Whether or not they had allegiances with Saddam Hussein or not, at the time, is irrelevant. I've seen many a criminal hide in plain view and even near the actual local police department because it's so easy to overlook things so close to home. Maybe that was the reason they were/are hiding there. Who knows and who cares. That's what I think got us in there, even though the strategy may have changed since then. Plain and simple, we just needed a good enough reason to get in there, and once we were there, there weren't gonna be too many people to argue what we should/shouldn't do, to stay there.

Damn it i miss this one. Several of us have debated this same issue several times. If you want proof of wmd's, alquada in iraq, or whatever else you think is bs on why we went to war with iraq please let me know i'll be more than happy to help get it for you or just get you the old thread so you can read how this ended last time.

ALERT!

Someone has tried to register using the IP Address 124.134.52.127 which is MATCHED IN THE RBL DATABASE of the proxies.dnsbl.sorbs.net RBL.

This registration attempt has been allowed and the account has been permanently banned.

Registration Details: seolin887 ( qiulian@lovesoftware.net )