Single question to Andrew Bacevich:

Why did we really invade Iraq?

The show being prerecorded, and before listening to it, I’ll posit, to Lilya, that we invaded Iraq out of an overflowing American sense of helplessness (in the face of 9/11 as well as in view of Saddam Hussein’s threatening stance to his own people), an overabundance of undeployed military wherewithal (maybe?), and … that’s it. Someone will say an eye for an eye, doesn’t matter whose, or how matched, targeted, fair: once smitten, will smite.
There is also the distraction motive, a need to create a riveting theater of concern. For among the populace: A lurking suspicion; an administration seemed on the brink of being almost sacrificially blamed. Even I had read the warnings in the newspapers in August 2001: Bin Laden to attack in the U.S. Bush was on vacation in Texas.

Yes, your are right Ellen. I was afraid that it could be pre-recorded. bummer.

Why did we invade Iraq? Looked at your reasons. The truth is…you are “guessing”. There is not one single eMail, letter, meeting minutes or sticky post-it note of the past administration about “why we should engage a ‘war’. Is this acceptable to you? Let us please do not quiet down, until we are told the reason.

Whatever it takes … commission, hearings, suphoenas, beatings, waterboarding, question under oath … somebody must, should, has to tell us why we lost so many arms and legs and eyes and lives while we were killing other people. Let’s not retire this subject until we get an answer.

Richard Haass, said on MSNBC (I can find undeniable URL) that there was not a single meeting at the White House about the invasion and the motive. That is bunch of Bull. High-school teams have meetings with minutes about the color/font changes for the jerseys.

Let’s not go away, until we get the “correct” answer that can be verified. Please look at this; how can this happen:
http://www.humangenome.org/iraq/sheehan.htm

This Poor Woman’s mission was to ask Bush “Why did my son die”, was it not?

If we flood the talk shows and tv programs with this demand every day, every program … we will get the “real” answer.

One reason was revenge. G.W.Bush was revenging the attempted assassination of his father H.W.Bush.
The other was the Neo-Cons obsession with Saddam Hussein.
Saddam Hussein was despot, and his demise it not a bad thing in the abstract. However the action was all muddled in deception. This war was, is the largest blunder in our modern history on a lot of levels. One is our standing in the world, it has destroyed it.
In human lives, over 100,000 Iraqi’s lost their lives in the invasion and immediate aftermath. US lives is now over 4000 with over 20,000 wounded and permanently damaged.

The amount of tax dollars wasted is out of control. The money spent in the last 6 years could have funded a national health system.

Lilya you keep looking for concrete answers to complex questions about geo-politics. You also keep linking to your web site which is full of it quite frankly.
What this shows me is that your very misinformed or that you take whatever information you need to support your ideology. Not unlike the Neo-Cons you are so against.

The “real” answer is in our national psyche, which is historically nationalistic and isolated at the same time.
Our worldview is distorted not only by the media, but by our education system. We are more interested in money sustaining our way of life. We are drugged on consumption and immediate gratification and this has been a something that has been in place since after WW2. In the 50’s when advertising became an art form and we had disposable income to spare, consumption and immediate gratification as our drug of choice became the norm. Now we are here, in 2009 and it’s obvious to me that we can not sustain this.

However I’m sure you’ll find someway of blaming Israel.

this is a very important thread. I agree with the person who originally posted that we should be given an answer.

the last posting [putney] is the issue. He is assuming/guessing what the reasons may be and he is content with it. There is no evidence that shows that he does or will demand concrete evidence as to why we really launched this invasion/war. He just expresses his opinions and that’s it. Done. This is the perfect example of being Dumbed Down.

This is wrong start. Let’s be free and clear of all suppositions. I agree with Lillya. We should not give up on this basic demand of telling us the reason for our sacrifices.

I encourage everyone who was inspired by Professor Bacevich call for grassroots action to bring about change in America to join Organizing for America and getting involved. Involvement is a starting point. http://www.barackobama.com/index.php

I’m listening to the show now.

This is one of the most important hours of commentary regarding our current situation that I’ve ever heard.

Once the archive is posted, I suggest that folks link to it like crazy. Because of Andrew Bacevich’s story, his is a voice that many will listen to.

Thank you so much for your service past, present, and future, Mr. Bacevich.

– stanley krute

I’m not sure who the “he” is Carlos g refers to.
I’m remembering the year before Abu Ghraib hit the news. I was corresponding with dozens of soldiers and sending care packages. One of them was an interrogator, and was trying to reason with his unit as to the … I don’t want to say it. Once the photos hit the news, it was clear why issues of basic humanity were stirring. And I had to stop writing because… My whole life had changed. I had to understand. Big Confusion had hit, and I objected. It was not the soldiers doing their job that was the issue. My issue was back here. How did this happen? Why?

World according to Putney:

Let’s find out why we invaded Iraq; but if the original motive goes back in time and all fingers point to “Israel’s geopolical security” and nothing else between 1992-1996; then it is not acceptable.

So, we have the desired outcome first, and we should arrange and manufacture historic facts to fit the lie at the end.

Excuse Moi

ps. Putney: These postings are not personally against you. You are a good person.

Of course, as if on queue, an obligatory snide remark toward the Catholic Church has to be made by the guest during the interview. Happy Memorial Day jerk!

carlos g how presumptuous of you to think I am content.
Far from it. However I take issue with people such as yourself who want to start fights and point fingers at people all in a guise of some kind of rational that your ideology is “right”. If I supported the war, then it’s your job to show me how I am wrong and should do so with rational debate and critical thinking. You have already turned me off to anything you have to say with your false accusations.

I never said I was content, the reasons I posted were and are pretty concrete and have been in the mix of this for years. Oil is another. Controlling the Middle East and it’s assets, oil is the main reason. But I would like to think most people would see this no matter what side they are on. It’s kind of obvious.

Fighting terrorism which is the wrong way to go as Andrew Bacevich has so elegantly pointed out is a police action. I have always thought this and have made statements to this effect on this forum.

Iraq is a failure, I predict that in a few years there will be another “Saddam Hussein” and he might be worse than the original. “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss”…
– “Won’t Get Fooled Again”, The Who

One could apply this it Obama as well.

Andrew Bacevich is exactly on point on this issue. Everyone remembers Eisenhower’s warning about when we have a president that doesn’t understand the “undue influence of the military industrial complex.” So do not underestimate or completely ignore the financial interests promoting the illusion of military solutions being the best and only option to solving these problems of our physical and economic security!
I would point out the absurdity of this approach with a question; “Has anyone attacked Sweden lately?” And with an answer logically following the folly of our current approach. “It must be because they are afraid of the Swedish air force”.
Good luck to Colonel Bacevich, he is oh so correct and the task of educating the people and leaders of this nation is probably close to impossible given the hysteria around any issue being deemed as having to do with “national security!”
S.D. Fraser

Lilya it’s obvious that one can’t dismiss Israel in this discussion. What was Israels influence in the decision to go to war, I’m sure they supported it. However I think it the influence is not as strong as people would like to think. Blaming every problem with the geopolitical issues of the Middle East is an over simplification of this regions problems. Are they a main player, without a doubt.
Do they call the shots, no.

Putney gets most of it, but not there yet.

Until we know what was promised during Cheney’s meeting with the Oil guys in the “Energy Meeting” of 2001, we will not get a smoking gun on Iraq. Unless we get a complete picture of the divvying up of the oil rights in Iraq, we won’t get a picture of the promises made to oil companies.

Basevich got to it when he reminded us all of how badly Carter was booed in 1979, when he gave what was called the “Malaise Speech.” Carter was trying to tell everyone that we had to change our ways. But even Carter failed to mention the pressure he was under to rescue the Shah in 1979. The pressure came from the Rockefellers, and the CIA, in the form of Kermit ‘Kim’ Roosevelt, who had great investments and interests in Iran, and who had engineered the coup overthrowing the democratically elected Mohammed Mossadegh in Iran.

This has always been about oil, but saying that misses the vital details that serve to fill in the picture. Don’t forget-these guys-the oil guys-are really the ones who will do ANYTHING to get the oil that they think is theirs by right.

I wish Obama well, but we’re going to have to organize around this, in the end.

Just heard the show and terrific, moving discussion about our way forward. Right away I wanted to send the show’s link to a bunch of friends, only to think that the message about the desperate need for fundamental cultural change would be too much even for my left-of-center pals. No wonder Bacevich is pessimistic. Big thanks to him for being on the show — and everything else.

Zeroing in now, I too wish Obama well, and ache for him maybe not getting off in the directions he intended. Whether it was generals in Iraq informing him or the moneyed interests undergirding the legislature, as Bacevich says, voting a president into office is not the end of responsibility. We haven’t elected a Messiah.
“We’re going to have to organize around this, in the end,” Mike Fender writes. Oh, boy. And how exactly. Bacevich stated at the end of the show that he hasn’t seen really anything to suggest a reorientation of the culture around a definition of freedom that is other than the freedom to — to — to drive fast and far, to consume at will.
Someone should regulate the advertisers. They persuaded us the American dream is just that. Or was that Eisenhower and his administration.
In any case, I wonder if On Point can help us put our ears to the ground and listen for shoots and leaves trying to get a start. — the better to assist and participate.

When Scotland Yard is investigating a crime and looking for a motive, they do not start from the date (or near the date) of the crime. They go Baaaaaaaaaaaaaack; as far as they can. The real motive lies in the “first date”.

The Hint is: 1992-1996. After that, starting with 1997 PNAC, they muddied the motive so that we cannot figure out. Between 1992-1996 there was no revenge, no oil, no WMD, no 9/11.

Did anybody see an Oil executive jumping up and down, saying “Let’s Invade Iraq for Oil”. We were the ones who did not want to do any business with Iraq. International Community was jumping up and down for getting rid of the sanctions and boycott. Oil is not the reason. Has never been the “original” motive. ***

Is this English enough? Folks, we have no direct stake in finding the motive other than our morals. Let’s be objective and smart, stop guessing.

*** there is a tiny-exception Mosul-Haifa pipeline. Please use Google generously.

The issue is to find a way of getting out of the “war” situations that we are in, before either things get out of hand or before we go broke.

There will always be pro-war and spending advocates who benefit from wasting our tax dollars towards indefinite time frame. The most definitive and easiest way of beating them is to go the root causes of why we turned our DoD into Department of Offense.

a) Find out what really happened on 9/11. Take a look at http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm do you see 9/11? There is a reason for that.

b) I agree with the call to investigate Iraqi Invasion (by participation of the Peace Activists and unbiased committee). We should get solid answers that can be backed by historical evidence. This will cost us less than one singe Apachee Helicopter with ROI of 680,000%

OK Lilya what was the real reason as you seem to know more than anyone else here, seem to have more knowledge of the international scene and the complex politics of the Middle East and Europe. What was it if oil was not one of the major factors.

As long as someone keeps up the drumbeat, we (Americans) will just keep on marching. But at long last we may have found ourselves a different drummer. Not Obama, but Andrew Bacevich. I’ll be buying his book at the earliest opportunity. President Obama is confounding many of us just as the colonel says, and it is the colonel’s logic–not the politicians’–that puts things in perspective. Colonel Bacevich is saying things I never thought I’d hear being said out loud. Of course! Of course it’s American cosumerism on steroids! Of course it’s about American (and Western) plunder of Middle Eastern oil! Of course it’s the folly of American colonialism and nation building! The title of his book is exactly right … “The End of American Exceptionalism” is precisely how and why we’re in the nasty throes of uncovering for ourselves … “The Limits of Power!” Right on! That’s exactly what we’re getting a mouthful of at this very time in history. C’mon all you neoconservative nation builders out there. Listen to the man. Get a grip on reality.

Mr. Putney,

No. I am not doing the work for you. We are going to do it together.

Let’s find out who the cheerleaders were conducting the marketing plan for America to invade Iraq. You come up with a few names and other will add more to the list.

Let’s do a scientific team effort, so that there will not be any party poopers.

William Kristol
Richard Pearl
Paul Wolfowitz
Colin Powell
….more…??

highly recommend:
http://www.zFacts.com
http://www.pnac.info

i recommend this link it is the president of the iraqi union. He talks about some of the shady deals the u.s. already had set up, and people to advance them even before invading .

we the show be online today?

oh heres the link

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcZx9S-TJn4

his name is hussan jamaa

We have a project with Mr. Putney

Let’s add more names…who sold this invasion to US Public. We need more names; we’ll stop at around 10 names and then we will go to step 2.

FYI, Scotland Yard always ignores events and here-say after the date of the crime. We are looking for hard evidence with date.

More names? for the Proponents link. Either talking heads in mainstream American media or in the Government
two more names… we have six, now
David Wurmser
Douglas Feith

I remember the talking heads and the neo-conservatives. We had a president who invoked the language of crusades, as if that would help us. It may have brought the far right on board; I don’t know. But it seems an academic exercise now. The peace activists may not have a retrospective role, actually, but an investigatory commission, with particular focus on the secret energy meetings at the beginning of the Bush administration, might. I doubt it though. Even much smaller businesses than Big Oil are frightfully private about their plans and schemes.
What I mean, is the Bacevich with Ashbrook were opening new doors, doors into the future: How to unwind and redirect. So this “thread” seems to have diverged from plan to blame, maybe putting a big drag on dialogue.
Voila: academic, accusatory, retrospective (introspective too). I know that’s not intended; it’s seems to be the evolving ambience, call it that.

Apologies Ellen. We are all aware of this thread for the big picutre and how can we get back on track. But, we are going get lost anyway, if we don’t hit on the major major topic.

Can you kindly offer us one Oil company executive or petro-profiteer who publicly or secretly has campaigned for getting rid of the liberal and secular regime in Iraq?

Let’s not forget; Andrew Bacevich would not have been here as a guest, if we had not gave in to the marketing campaigns of 9-10 (max 12) Middle Aged White Men with dark powers. This is not that complicated.

We owe this to ourselves and to this world.

I challenge you … give me one war, any war after 2000 B.C.; I’ll tell you exactly why it was waged. But ask about the real reason for the Iraqi invasion… I have no clue.

Thank you, Mr. Bacevich. Yes, our culture needs deep adjustments. Money and material goods can improve the quality of life by providing things like healthful food, health care, indoor plumbing and heating, and electricity. The USA culture has an obsession with excessive consumption of worthless products. Reflecting this afternoon upon your ideas from Tom Ashbrooks radio program this morning, I looked up the web site to give you a personal thank you. I want to do what I can to help the cultural shift. I grew up in a highly educated professional family that knows how to make money, but gets self esteem and happiness from love, interaction with each other, and nature. We drive our cars for 10-15 years until they die. What do we need to do? Start with infants and three year olds? Deep self esteem (yes, taking the hard knocks and slings and arrows of outrageous fortune too) should solve many of our culture’s problems. How to get there. Mr. Bacevich please do continue to promote these values.

Your Memorial Day show was great. Something besides little tiny flags planted at graves. (nothing wrong w/that but there’s more to MD than that) You were getting to the real question of why we fight these stupid wars. (stupid leaders) I am a Marine combat veteran of Vietnam, and it seems to me from my experience that the U.S. Military is very competent in winning on the battlefield. It’s when we leave that all that effort, blood, and treasure seems wasted. I still recall the NVA tanks rolling through Saigon as we exited the embassy. Equipment thrown off decks of ships to make room for Vietnamieze civilians that were fearful of being killed because they supported or worked for the Americans. I feel we should consider the consequences of our actions after the battles are fought before exposing our nation and the nations involved to our firepower. It is superior to most any, so called, enemy. With it carries a responsibility to use it only when necessary, and all else fails.

I’d like to encourage anyone concerned about our troops to listen to veterans testify about their experiences in Iraq:

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/5/25/memorial_day_specialwinter_soldier_on_the

Potent stuff.

I was absoolutely riveted by Andrew Bacevich’s book — and stunned by his strength of character, in that he did not allowed the loss of his son to deflect his commitment to dispassionate reason. Channeling anger and loss into constructive and solution-oriented thinking is not something that comes easily to most of us. I was particularly moved by his observation that Memorial Day is best observed by looking out for the interests of service personnel who are still alive, by questioning and holding our leaders accountable for the decisions made from this point on.

Just one point, however. It is all very well to say now that Al Quaida ought to be treated like an international criminal organization, to be addressed by the likes of the CIA and MI5 — that the US ought not to be trying to remake countries on the other side of the world in their image. But can we just say Ooops — we made a mistake, you guys handle it from here — dust ourselves off and walk away from a country shattered by war, with its infrastructure destroyed, with most of its productive citizenry having fled — how does that serve the people in that country who are NOT extremist lunatics but might be left to deal with the ones that are?

I wish too that Professor Bacevich had talked more about the gross inadequacies in our intelligence gathering capabilities with respect to that part of the world. About the fact that fancy double-o-seven technology and remote controlled drones cannot substitute for reliable sources of information on the ground. The military and civil leadership cannot take decisions in the best interests of either our service personnel or this country as long as this aspect of national security is left without scrutiny. The idea that the enemy can be simply bombed into submission and reined in by military superiority alone — is myopic and stupid.

I think Mr. Bacevich is spot on. The enemy is our own ignorance and malaise. We can’t change the world and we can’t persist with our own old ways of energy consumption and expect things to work out. I too am pesimistic. But you never know there’s always hope I guess.
As for reasons for the Iraq invasion, which as many know wasn’t even related to 9/11, (Afganistan certainly was) I imagine they were multiple, though I don’t know for certain or in what priority any more than do the other posters. I think it was for all the reasons mentioned above like oil, a wish to protect Israel’s interests by a stongly Christian president who felt kinship with Jewish Israel, and just a combination of Bush’s ignorance of the Islamic peoples and how they would react and his arrogance in regard to our military superiority. I really think he partly did it because he could! I still remember the shots of Bush on that aircraft carrier at the start of the Iraqi invasion. In his old flight jacket talking to the troops he reminded me of a little kid playing war. I think he was more animated and giddy with excitement than I’ve ever seen him since.

Can you kindly offer us one Oil company executive or petro-profiteer who publicly or secretly has campaigned for getting rid of the liberal and secular regime in Iraq?
– Lilya Lopekha

To my knowledge Iraq was not a liberal or secular regime anytime in it’s recent history. While he was a leading member of the revolutionary Ba’ath Party, which espoused secular pan-Arabism, economic modernization, and Arab socialism it’s clear that he was a tyrant and a dictator.

If you were Shi’a or Kurdish I doubt you would have thought that his regime was secular.

Saddam Hussein was many things, being a liberal was not some of them.

Can you kindly offer us one Oil company executive or petro-profiteer who publicly or secretly has campaigned for getting rid of the most conservative, racist, most evil jerk regime in Iraq?

The issue is: requesting a name of an oil executive, not details Saddams curriculum vitae

I believe oil was the primary motivator for the Iraq invasion. Not Iraq’s oil. Caspian Sea oil.

One part of my rational is the potential quantity of oil in the region and thus economic benefit. Second is the distribution of oil to China and India limiting the supply to the US. Third the financial gain for Russia and Russia’s potential return as a global player, which US leadership is focused on thwarting. And fourth is the easiest route to deliver oil to the US from Baku is through Azerbaijan, perhaps through a sliver of Armenia, across a strip of Turkey and into Iraq where the pipelines and highway systems are in place to move oil to Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf.

I believe Saudi Arabia would appreciate handling additional oil reserves for their economic benefit.

Dear Rick10

Year 2004, we were guessing that Oil was the major motive. The conditions of the Invasion did not change at all, but Oil went up 400% and came back down to 120% level.

Year 2009, we are guessing that Oil was the major motive. There is something wrong here.

Isn’t it time to look at the evidence and ask hard/bold questions.

In a few hours, you will see a “complete” list of Invasion Marketing people who sold us the idea between Sep 11, 2001 8:00 pm Wash time to March 20, 2003 5:33 Baghdat time. And then I hope we will collectively pick the top 10-12 of them and figure out what their original motive(s) were. Fair Game?

If you are part of a passionate marketing campaign, you have to have reasons to perform this task, right?

Investigative Journalism with Public Participation
—————————————————–
Here is the list of people who publicly advocated attacking Iraq/Saddam for regime change. They sold the War between Sep 11 evening till we started the bombings on March 20, 2003 morning. They either made up reasons or scared us, so that the congress will give the authority to Bush.

Question: Can you add more names, if you know any withing the next 2-3 days. And then we will separate the list to two: names that might possibly believe and/or may benefit from the fact that “oil” and occupation are linked (ie. Dick Cheney). Pleae think about who might fall into the “oil-man/oil-puppet” category.

Elliot Abrams
Madeleine Albright
John Ashcroft
Robert B. Zoellick
Jeffrey Bergner
John Bolton
Frank Carlucci
Dick Cheney
James Colbert
Paula Dobriansky
Paula Dobriansky
Charles Fairbanks, Jr.
Douglas Feith
Francis Fukuyama
Newt Gingrich
Richard Haass
Stephen Hadley
Robert J. Loewenberg
William J. Bennett
Frederick Kagan
Robert Kagan
Zalmay Khalilzad
Jeane Kirkpatrick
William Kristol
Richard L. Armitage
Michael Ladeen
Joe Lieberman
Lewis Libby
Robert Loewenberg
John Negroponte
Richard Perle
Daniel Pipes
Colin Powell
Condoleezza Rice
Dennis Ross
Karl Rove
Peter Rodman
Donald Rumsfeld
James Schelisger
William Schneider, Jr.
George W. Bush
Peter W. Rodman
Vin Weber
Paul Wolfowitz
R. James Woolsey
David Wurmser
Meyrav Wurmser
John Yoo
Dov Zakheim

Forgot to add….one more name
David Frum

Can anybody come up with Oil exec’s who publicly wanted Saddam to be removed so that he/company can get oil exploration contracts?

So, let’s add more names until Friday morning, OK?

Then we can split the list into Oil and Non-Oil people, and Monday we can try to find Oil connection/motive for the Occupation through those names, one by one. Let’s see how many secret Oil motives we can discover.

[...] On On Point for Memorial Day. [...]

Yes of course oil; it’s the lifeblood of the economy.

I don’t approve of the war but the war was also about the above listed names and their view on America’s role in the world. We helped create Saddam and soft power is not always applicable.

“Yes of course oil….”

Frederic C.

Is this an assumption or a fact. If you got an eMail from Cheney or Bush about the motive for occupation, can you share it with us?

Could you please play along…..that’s what we are trying to figure out. Our journalists have failed us, so we are doing it here collectively.

One more addiotion to the list:
Charles Krauthammer

Lilya your assume as well. No one can answer your questions. You keep being belligerent when you don’t get your way or the answer you want. Constantly yelling at people is a complete turn off. I don’t know about the rest of the people who post here, your list is the usual suspects of the last 15 years or so. Your point is what exactly, that there is some vast government conspiracy going on here. Or, That in some secret Israeli bunker there is some Dr.Strangelove kind of character pulling all these puppet strings.

We may never know, oil was, is a factor. If there was no oil in Iraq we would not have invaded. As we don’t in North Korea, which is also a serious threat to Asia.

assuming, sorry for the typo…

Putney,

If you are going to be negative about investigative journalism, then stay at home and don’t come out to play.

This board is optional. Shutting down people who are asking question is Patriotism? Is that what you believe in?

If you have any objections to any of the names, point out the specifics. These names are people who actively wrote about and publicly spoke out between Sep 2001 – March 2003 for hitting Saddam/Iraq with US Military Might at any cost (with 99% accuracy).

Can we have civility and get along, please.

This is very interesting. This guy Putnam does not want to investigate why we attacked Iraq. Additionally, he wants to block an attempt to get to the truth. Very very interesting.

I guess, we deserve what we have gotten during the last eight years.

The next eight years… who knows, I already have doubts.

Very very impressed by this guy–I’m shopping for his books as we speak.

Regarding motives for invading Iraq, it seems every instance in which the U.S. has toppled a foreign regime–overtly or covertly–there was lust for both control and economic spoil.

At least, this is when I reflect on those instances I am aware of. The interesting thing is, I am constantly learning of more (just last night, for instance, I read about heretofore unknown U.S. interference in Haiti). I call this my adult reeducation, attempting to repair the damage done by that piece of propaganda known as high school history class.

I think sometimes the problem on part of Americans is a failure to connect the dots. There are a heck of a lot of reasons for people everywhere to hate us. Until we get at the underlying injustices in our own way of doing business, we will remain a central target for resentment, and terrorism.

Somewhere between 10,960 and 30,557 civilians have died in Afghanistan since our invasion, yet we continue the bloodshed.

We have no moral legitimacy now from which to lecture anyone. Obama criticizing North Korea on rocket launches while the U.S. harbors some 5,500 nuclear bombs is just laughable. We continue to speak but not to listen. We continue to brutalize but not repent. And we continue to wage war, unjust economic policies, and propaganda far and near.

Martin Luther Kind Jr. said, “Many of the ugly pages of American history have been obscured and forgotten. A society is always eager to cover misdeeds with a cloak of forgetfulness, but no society can fully repress an ugly past when the ravages persist into the present. America owes a debt of justice which it has only begun to pay.”

He also said, “Through violence you may murder the liar, but you cannot murder the lie, nor establish the truth. Through violence you may murder the hater, but you do not murder hate. In fact, violence merely increases hate. So it goes.”

And perhaps most poignantly, “Peace is not the absence of war, but the presence of justice.”

It is amazing that anyone who posts in support of cultural self analysis is shot down. That is the reason why we went to war. We want to drive our big cars, fly around, pollute, waste, and then once a few months go on a “save the earth” walk.

America is a CONSUMER society. It is a glutton. It needs energy, vast, vast amounts of energy. It will have to kill, decimate, destroy everything on its way to access energy.

It needs energy for planes and automobiles, for the laptop I am typing on.

Freedom is to be free of gluttony.

That is why everyone is trying to find a few people to hang in the square. No, GWB did what we asked him to do. Keep my car running while I sit on the couch and watch monday night football, vacation all over the world.

What makes you think we deserve to do such things? Who is going to pay for it?

Until we do what the speaker says, we are a sick nation that is going to do whatever it take militarily to survive to the next day. Keep morning in America bright with the energy from where ever possible, that is the mission of our presidents. We elected Obama because he promises that without the bloodshed. But that is as much an illusion as Morning in America was.

That is how the world has run, from the Romans, Greeks, Britain and any other empire you wish to name, in any order. Bring consumables from where ever you can to keep the rights that an empire bestows on its people.

There are no unicorns. It is just us, our waste, and gluttony. We pay 90% tax so that our government brings us energy.

Are we ready to stop? No. I agree with the speaker. This is a natural phenomena called empire. Get used to it. You can’t resolve it if you use more than 1 kilowatt-hour of energy today. That is your quota. You use 5. It is you and me, us. US.

I’ve read Andrew Bacevich. I agree with him–to a certain extent. Unfortunately, he’s gotten hung up on neoconservatism and is forgetting there’s much more to the issue of war.

Why remain in Afghanistan. Not just oil. The International Crisis Group–a group working for world peace, and not American–recommends NOT pulling out now because of security of the whole region.

What about the changes in the military, which Bacevich seems to be ignoring–most of our troops are being sent there to do TRAINING.

And who had input into the current policy? Not just the Pentagon (although there were 3 different American teams of military thinkers which submitted plans), but a British military think tank, RUSI, and 2 foundations for peace–the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and the U.S. Institute for Peace.

Nothing’s simple.

Lilya Lopekha your a real piece of work. You don’t run this forum. Who are you to tell anyone what to do.
You want to use this forum as your own personal sounding board and when people like me disagree with you and criticize your intentions you get all huffy.

“If you are going to be negative about investigative journalism, then stay at home and don’t come out to play.”

I be an do whatever I want here, I’m not playing your little adolescent passive aggressive game. Grow up.

You call what your doing investigative journalism? Are you kidding me?

First off this is not your web site or forum, you do not have the right to conduct any kind of survey anymore than I do. To use this public forum for your own personal gains is disgusting and not journalism.

Start your own blog or web site. Also try using design, that Gnome page needs design work. Blogs are free make yur own blog and then do your “investigative journalism”.

I don’t understand why the producers have not shut you down yet, it’s obvious to me that your using this forum for personal reasons and because you have an audience.

This is from today’s forum:
We are duing a Public Investigative Journalism Project about the Reasons/Motives for Invation of Iraq.
Was it for “Oil” (90% of the public opinion), or anything else.

Please participate here (towards the end of Comments)
http://www.onpointradio.org/2009/05/memorial-day-2009#comments

Who are we? Are you more than one person? Do you speak for some group?

I don’t know about other people as I speak for myself, but I do not think this forum should be used for your games.

Start your own blog.

Please Putney

Stop being personal. You are not enough to shut down this self-investigative journalism effort.

You said… we have invaded Iraq for Oil.

Can you pick the names from the list who might loosely be associated with Oil Companies and/or may profit when Iraq is not longer under Sunni Saddam and is ruled by more nationalistic and conservative Shia’s that are closer to Iran?

Please pick the Oil Names from the list and present them to us.

Thank you

I’m not interested in your game Lilya, period.
As I said you should start your own blog.
This is not your forum, it’s not mine, it belongs to WBUR.
As far as I can tell your not a journalist and evidence of your postings confirm this. Stop being personal? Please your whole act is based on this, I don’t buy your new persona one bit.

Start your own blog. This is not the place for your “self-investigative journalism effort” whatever that means or is.

Putney,

Can you imagine. You are going to a political speech, and during the Q&A Session, 98% of the audience comes up to the microphone to announce that they don’t have a question for the speaker.

Please be more understanding. Nobody is forcing you to participate to the Public Investigative Journalism effort above.

Hey Liliya

Wow, that is a good list. Although I don’t know some of them.

Count me in, I will participate this project.

One of our neighbors was in Iraq in a school for girls project. One of the questions, she was asked by a girl who knows english well was about why they picked iraq and she said she did not have any answer for the poor girl.

Why are we still in Iraq? obama said we would be leaving but now his leading General said we are going to be there for another ten years? Why did obama lie?

David,

The answer is simple. Obama’s Heart was speaking during the campaign. After the election, he surrounded himself with people with agenda’s and generals and neo-Dem-cons.

If you want to us to get out of Iraq in a hurry, let’s find out why we are there.

When was the last time you discussed getting out of the car, without knowing why you got in, in the first place.

Lilya

To your list, you should add Fox news people, too.
Don’t forget Rush.

Great job.

[...] Andrew Bacevich: America and War – On Point with Tom Ashbrook Memorial Day is a day to honor service and sacrifice. [...]

Like Lilya Lopekha and many others, I really want to know the reason(s) why we invaded Iraq. I want to know specifically what the Bush Administration had in mind: what was their plan? what did they hope to gain or protect? what was it that motivated them? what results did they expect? There are lots of possible reasons for the invasion, many of which are stated in the postings above. And there are reasons to discredit any of them.

One might think that it doesn’t matter anymore, that the damage is done, and now we just have to clean up the mess as best we can. But for the sake of the future of America and of the world, we need to know how our government makes momentous decisions. There are real threats to all that we care about: Global Warming, Nuclear Proliferation, the Human Population Explosion, the Ongoing Anthropogenic Mass Extinctions, to name a few. The US is immensely powerful. If we knew how our government makes decisions, if the process was made more transparent, even retroactively, we might have a better chance of fighting for good outcomes in these and other matters. Minimally it might encourage us to elect serious, intelligent, and fair minded people to high office, and avoid electing ideologically minded visionaries and minions for corporations that operate without responsibility for their own actions.

In the absence of any plausible explanations for the invasion from the Bush Administration (that I am aware of at least), it seems that a good possibility is that there was a desire to assert control of Iraq’s oil fields and to position a dominating force in the midst of the Mideast’s oil rich region. As Colonel Bacevich eloquently points out, the essence of Reagan’s “morning in America” was the idea that we Americans can have what we want when we want it, and don’t have to worry about consequences. What we want is cheap energy to enable our wasteful and destructive way of life. For those persuaded by Reagan’s vision and seeking to realize it, Iraq’s oil fields would be an appealing prize.

Or instead I can imagine someone making the more responsible argument that even if we go full speed ahead on alternatives to fossil fuels, we are not going to have them in sufficient quantity soon enough and therefore ought to seize Iraq’s oil; in addition, the US would secure a geopolitical advantage by keeping the oil of Iraq and its neighbors from China, Russia, etc. One might regret the immorality of such an adventure, but it seems a conceivable motivation for what was done.

Another possibility is that there were a great many varied rationales put forth by the individuals on Lilya’s list, some of them perhaps reality based, others not: that lots of parties saw something for themselves in the invasion of Iraq or for the causes they support, and there really wasn’t a single overriding reason why the invasion was undertaken. The scary thing is that it could be that Bush, an incurious and unimaginative individual if there ever was one, was manipulated by advisors with a variety of interests but with a consensus on what ought to be done, and that he (in his own words “the decider”), together with his inner circle just did it without thinking it through.

But this is all just speculation. Useful as far as it goes, but really we don’t want to know what the likely possibilities are. We want to know what was going through the heads of those who made the decisions, what went on in the deliberations, what the arguments were pro and con, what outcomes and consequences were anticipated, etc. So far the principals aren’t talking.

If any of you high ranking members of the Bush Administration are following this discussion, could you enlighten us?

Erik

Thank you for your support. When we go to the second step (next week)… grouping these individuals as “oil” or “non-oil” people, you will see the motive will start forming in front of our eyes.

One good thing is there is a pattern. The “core” supporters are interested in one subject; not the big picture like the global order, or what is best for the universe. The will make our job easier and we will get to the bottom of “Why we invaded Iraq”

Help us divide the list, make suggestions…”oil” or “not-oil” names.

WBUR–

Right or wrong, I don’t care, but you have to shut Lilya down N-O-W!!!! The hijacking of this forum she does is now beyond belief with this “investigative” project. It does not belong here AT ALL. Those who are interested need to follow her into another venue–facebook, my space, personal blog, where ever. This is now crazy, and a disservice to everyone else here to have one person who thinks she runs the show hijack each and every discussion to the point of obsession. Just because one is a regular contributor does not give you ownership rights to a forum like this. E-nough!

Meant to say

“I don’t care if SHE is right or wrong…”

Lin P.

With all due respect, what is the harm to “you”. This is not a project for inventing lies, it is about finding the “truth”.

One of the reason is that the Pop Media, NPR, WBUR and the Congress are not doing their jobs. Or else, you could have posted here the “real reason” why we invaded a soverign country accross oceans. But you cannot.

Please, do not lose your civility. Or else, go back to your newspaper and b/W TV. Times are different.

No one is losing their civility, but you have lost any sense of boundaries. Times ARE different, but what remains certain is that THIS IS NOT YOUR BOARD!!!! If you had one degree of the awareness of boundaries, or that which is appropriate on a forum like this, you would re-read what you just wrote and thunk yourself in the forehead with a “duh” of awareness. Not going to happen, I’m quite sure.

You tell people what they can and cannot think. You self-appointed arbiter of “civility” according to your POV. WBUR continues to give you a platform for your personal agenda that needs to be in a personal blog, or on a social media site like FB. You are out of line so much of the time here, and there is no way you’ll ever see it. This “investigative” operation has no place here. Do it on your own sites. You need to be shut down. Period. Period. Period.

And as far as “times are changing,” by your own declaration you are a 26 y/o child who has yet to develop the maturity and the breadth of experience to understand how one interacts on a board like this. It is you who are out of touch. Young lady, this is not your sandbox.

I think it is clear that Lilya’s project is off point. I’d say Nassim’s post is more to the crux of Bacevich’s argument than who specifically can give a Lilya approved answer to why we invaded iraq.
As I see it, Bacevich makes two main claims. First that we have mistakenly chosen to fight a global war on terror militarily, and two that our culture of mindless consumerism predisposes us to view the rest of the world as our resource regardless of the consequences. The consequences of this twin mistake are legion and malignant. Obama has tempered previous policy, but essentially continues it. Carter’s “malaise” speech was a roundly criticized outlier of American foreign policy. This country has invaded new lands for territory and resources since its founding–little has changed on that front.
My question is this. Has the economic downturn/collapse been sufficient to really call into question our culture of over-consumption that drives our resource dominating foreign policy? I see some changes, but are they merely superficial or more long-term?
If you haven’t already seen it, Bacevich had an excellent interview on Bill Moyers Journal some months ago. I recommend it also.

Disagree. We have been “consumers” for ages, but we haven’t invaded any country for a commodity.

Wney you want the commodity you just buy the darn thing in world markets. Nobody has any monopoly in Oil, let alone having the internation beef to exercise single-handed speculation.

Invading Saudi Arabia makes more sense in dollars.

You invade a country to bring the commodity price down? or Up? Is there any commodity that is not traded competitively in the world markets?

What was the purpose of invading Iraq for Oil? Better quality oil? Making Oil exec’s richer? Wouldn’t it be easier, if we lifted the “we are not interested in your oil fields ambargo” in 2002?

Let’s invade South Africa. Who does not like Gold.

OK, Fine. We invaded Iraq for Oil! Based on what peice of evidence. Meeting Minutes? White House eMail? Did Cheney personally call anybody about the real reason?

Pleeaaasse, are we really really that dumb?

Liliya is on to something.

Have been watching progressive TV shows as usual. Mostly, the only one who is hammering this point is Chris Matthews.

The causal connection between Torture, Iraq and manufacturing evidence that might gloss over why we did the right thing.

Remember Ron Suskind’s book. There was plenty of effort by the administration to create false pretenses. I believe when Oil was on the table in the 1972 political ambargo, every thing (threats) was out in the open.

There is always less uncertainty of supply of any commodity when the bombers are in play. So war is a bad idea for everybody who produce and consume.

Who was it warning about losing civility? Lilya, a contrary opinion to yours does not make one dumb. My argument is based on having some familiarity with Bacevich’s argument. Why we invaded Iraq is only tangential to this.
I’m pretty sure that Native Americans, Mexico, Spain, and most of Central America would disagree that the US has never before invaded for land or other commodities. On the other hand our consumer society as it is now constituted (easy credit, incessant commercialism, diminishing social structures to balance the consumerist onslaught, the patriotism of consumption, etc.)only fully came into its own in the 80’s. So my question stands, what do people think? Is the current economic situation enough to fundamentally change the trajectory we’ve been on for 30 years?

Mr. Rievler,

We don’t have to blur the issue. We are talking “only” about Iraq – which has cost my familily and your family average $15,000 each. An illegal invasion of another country also indirectly harms Native Americans, Mexico, Spain and Central America. Please be brave, I am begging you.

If your bank deducts $15 from you account, you don’t take rainy weather or bank manager breaking his leg as an excuse, do you? There has to be concrete name for the charge. Period.

No, Sir. This is a war! Lives have been lost. In a democratic society, we HAVE to demand the real reason. In a dictatorship, the king can do whatever he wants.

Please let’s forget about what we have been fed for years.

I know Mr. Bacevich well. Just because one person is not asking the right question, does not mean some criminals can and should get away with starting a war without a national interest.

If Mr. Bacevich asks the “right” question or try to do what we are doing here collectively, do you really think he will find a publisher and/or will get airtime on OnPoint?

I also wish for BUR to put a stop to this childish hijacking of this forum. I have suggested that you, Lilya start your own blog. You keep insulting people who disagree with as the above exchange shows. The pattern is now clear, you write a long post, then you get people who agree with you, all well and good. Then someone disagrees with you and you start to go off. Finally your immaturity shows and you start to act like the child you are.

Please, start your own blog.

LinP,

Just try to ignore, ‘Lilya,’or whomever they may be. She has no interest learning anything’ she just wants to push her assertions and get people to bite.

I know it’s hard to ignore her because of her scorching ignorance of world history and context. It’s hard to leave unanswered her racist views, but I recommend trying, and believe she has a right to express herself; even if the logical conclusion of her ideas are abhorrent.

Here is the list. People who tried to sell the war to American people.
List 1: Possible or Remote Connection to “Oil”
List 2: People who have no public trace of “Oil” motivated

Are there any objections to the separation of List1 and List2. Then we will look for histric evidence of Oil/$ as the motive.

People who believe that we Invaded Iraq for Oil or Oil Related matters… get ready! Your chance to post who said what connecting the Iraq Invasion to America’s worries about oil supply and/or Oil Contracts.

The “Oil” names:
George Bush
Frank Carlucci
Dick Cheney
Lewis Libby
John Ashcroft
Newt Gingrich
Francis Fukuyama
Richard Armitage
John Negroponte
Colin Powell
Condoleezza Rice
Tom Ridge
Karl Rove
Donald Rumsfeld
James Schelisger
John Yoo
William Bennett
Stephen Hadley
Zalmay Khalilzad
Jeane Kirkpatrick

The Non-Oil Names:
Elliot Abrams
Madeleine Albright
Jeffrey Bergner
John Bolton
Paula Dobriansky
Charles Fairbanks, Jr.
Douglas Feith
David Frum
Aaron Friedberg
Richard Haass
Robert J. Loewenberg
R. James Woolsey
Frederick Kagan
Robert Kagan
Donald Kagan
Charles Krauthammer
William Kristol
Michael Ladeen
Joe Lieberman
Richard Perle
Daniel Pipes
Norman Podhoretz
Dennis Ross
Peter Rodman
William Schneider, Jr.
Stephen Solarz
Vin Weber
Paul Wolfowitz
David Wurmser
Meyrav Wurmser
Dov Zakheim
Robert Zoellick

You don’t need any investigative effort, it is obvious.
All of the talk of weapons of mass destruction was just a cheap smokescreen for the goyim. This war’s justification was based on the Jew Paul Wolfowitz’s doctrine of pre-emptive action. This sort of doctrine is a prime example of how Jews come up with complex, deceptive theoretical frameworks for their desired outcomes. It also demonstrates how they corrupt the laws and traditions of their host countries, plotting as a tiny minority to use the resources of their host country for their benefit. We have come to the point in our history when Jews have pushed aside our founding fathers’ cautionary words about foreign entanglements and replaced that tradition with a crude ****-everyone-else / Israel-first hegemony. It is now morally okay to attack countries the Jews claim to believe may some day harm us (in reality, pose a threat to Israel).

Can you imagine Jews tolerating this type of criteria being applied to them? Israel has invaded Lebanon, so we need to preemptively stop them from doing it again? Jews have spied on America in numbers vastly out of proportion to their percentage in the general population, so we must preemptively exclude their access to sensitive government positions? Jews have destroyed an American warship so we must preemptively attack them to prevent them from doing this again? Yeah, right. The Jews would shriek “antisemitism!” at 130 decibels. But this is the moral justification they have given us for war! That they would never tolerate this type of moral justification themselves simply exposes them as the world’s biggest and most ethnocentric amoral hypocrites.

VNN readers need to emphatically let their anti-war liberal friends know that this war is not about oil. These liberals are perennially confused but can sometimes be swayed by solid evidence. Convince them that it’s not about oil and their number-two theory takes the stage. The American Petroleum Institute reports that the U.S. imports 60% of its oil from abroad and only 24% of that oil even comes from the Persian Gulf: Here. It has been widely reported that Iraq has the world’s second largest proven oil reserves. However, what isn’t often reported is that these reserves are only 3 – 6% of world total oil reserves. Oil reserves are geographically distributed throughout the world-from Venezuela and Nigeria to Indonesia and Norway. Also, all of this war mongering has increased, rather than decreased, the price of oil. Only after the war started did the price of oil rapidly decline: Here. Before the war mongering began, the price was headed down. Warmongering increased the price of oil by 50% per barrel. Your liberal friends need to understand this.

Jews have been front and center in advocating this war. Neocon Jew William Kristol’s “think tank,” Project for a New American Century http://www.newamericancentury.org/ began pushing for this war years before the September 11th attacks. In a 1998 letter to President Clinton, Kristol pushed for removing Saddam’s regime from power. There were 18 signatories on this letter: Elliott Abrams, Richard L. Armitage, William J. Bennett, Jeffrey Bergner, John Bolton, Paula Dobriansky, Francis ***uyama, Robert Kagan, Zalmay Khalilzad, William Kristol, Richard Perle, Peter W. Rodman, Donald Rumsfeld, William Schneider, Jr., Vin Weber, Paul Wolfowitz, R. James Woolsey and Robert B. Zoellick. Approximately half are Jews. Jews are 2.5% of the general American population.

Nine days after the September 11th attacks, Kristol was at it again with a new open letter to President Bush. Kristol devoted three (3) lines in this letter to Osama bin Laden, eight (8) lines to Iraq and twelve (12) lines to Israel and its enemies. There were 41 signatories on this letter: William Kristol, Richard V. Allen, Gary Bauer, Jeffrey Bell, William J. Bennett, Rudy Boshwitz, Jeffrey Bergner, Eliot Cohen, Seth Cropsey, Midge Decter, Thomas Donnelly, Nicholas Eberstadt, Hillel Fradkin, Aaron Friedberg, Francis ***uyama, Frank Gaffney, Jeffrey Gedmin, Reuel Marc Gerecht, Charles Hill, Bruce P. Jackson, Eli S. Jacobs, Michael Joyce, Donald Kagan, Robert Kagan, Jeane Kirkpatrick, Charles Krauthammer, John Lehman, Clifford May, Martin Peretz, Richard Perle, Norman Podhoretz, Stephen P. Rosen, Randy Scheunemann, Gary Schmitt, William Schneider, Jr., Richard H. Shultz, Henry Sokolski, Stephen J. Solarz, Vin Weber, Leon Wieseltier and Marshall Wittmann. Once again, half were Jews. Many of the remaining are employed by think tanks funded by Jews. Remember, Jews comprise 2.5% of the American population. This is no coincidence. Anybody who tells you it is just a coincidence is either a liar or a moron.

eliCo not sure what to say. But as a Jew I am offended by your blatant antisemitism. Jews don’t control the world.
That fact that some Jewish organizations lobby for their interest does not mean all Jews are to blame for all the worlds problems. I don’t have the same world view as any of the people you posted.

Your post reads like something out Mein Kampf. Your ignorance and moronic behavior is noted.

eliCo,

To make a counter-argument would only imply you offered any argument to begin with.

You are outside of the realm of reason and actively at battle with the world of decency.

this war is not for America…because lose

Richard Haass on C-Cpan

Lying, Lying, Lying … connecting 2003 Invasions to Kuwait/1991 Gulf Events and bluring everything, so that we will never wake up and use a term called “Israel” ragarding the Motive.

3 days before Colin Powell’s speech about the Yellow Cake all British Newspapers [Guardian/Independent/Finanacial Times] (as page one News) disclosed that papers were forged, Niger Embassy in Italy were broken into (funded by Michael Ladeen).

Didn’t anybody in CIA/US Government have a 0.75 GBP to buy a British Newpaper from a newstand in 2003?

Lilya Lopekha can’t post without mentioning the country of Israel and blaming this country for the worlds trouble.

Next you’ll be blaming the Jews for global warming.

I have some words for you: Ganif, kvetch, shlemiel.

Mister Putney,

Shalom. If you are not on the right side of the issues and support the international law and justice, we (the jews) should stay out of this argument. Because, you/we are biased. Poor Palestinians has not political power in USA. It is just not fair.

I will ignore you from now on. You have a stake in this discussion. Probably you packed a clean pair of underwear in your suitcase, in case Jesus comes back to Jerrusalem without a press conference in Tel Aviv.

OK, the time is up. We are moving on with our Public Investigative Journalism Project, because the Commercial Media has failed us.

Can somebody, anybody find a link/data showing that the “oil-names” have ever pushed or promoted Occupation of Iraq for a reason that is related with “Oil” between 09/11/2001-03/20/2003? Especially the ones who claim that we have invaded Iraq for “Oil” and/or to support our lifestyle and/or My SUV said “please violate international laws”. Whatever it is….please act now. Now is your chance to support your claim, show a single piece of circumstantial evidence. Pleaaaase.

Thank you.

[possible] Oil-names are:
George Bush
Frank Carlucci
Dick Cheney
Lewis Libby
John Ashcroft
Newt Gingrich
Francis Fukuyama
Richard Armitage
John Negroponte
Colin Powell
Condoleezza Rice
Tom Ridge
Karl Rove
Donald Rumsfeld
James Schelisger
John Yoo
William Bennett
Stephen Hadley
Zalmay Khalilzad
Jeane Kirkpatrick

The only two subjects that I can think of were
- Dick Cheney’s secret energy meeting with the oil exec’s
- Chevron’s naming a tanker after Condi

but both of them were before 9/11 and they were two unrelated and isolated news at that time.

I wonder if anybody else can find something.

January 2003
The top intelligence officer for Africa warns the Bush administration that the Nigerien uranium claim is without merit.

January 9, 2003
Mohamed El Baradei, head of the IAEA, reports to the UN that the Iraqi aluminum tubes are intended for conventional rockets.

January 28, 2003
Bush gives his State of the Union speech, in which he utters the famous sixteen words.

February 4, 2003
When asked to provide additional reasons (beyond the Italian forgeries) to the IAEA for concern about the Niger allegations, the U.S. mentions the CIA report from Joe Wilson’s trip. This was the first time any intelligence agency used the report to support the allegations that Iraq was attempting to acquire uranium.

February 5, 2003
Secretary of State Colin Powell addresses the UN, making the case for war. Powell does not mention the Niger allegation, though he does use the aluminum tubes and MBLs to defend the war.

February 9, 2003
The United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) searches Curveball’s former worksite and determines his claims about MBLs to be false.

March 7, 2003
IAEA announces that the documents on which the Nigerien uranium claim is based are crude forgeries. They informed the administration of this four days earlier, on March 3.

March 8, 2003
On CNN, Joe Wilson suggests the administration knew the Niger claims were wrong. On the same day, the DIA again uses the report on Wilson’s trip to support allegations that Iraq sought uranium.

The History has no brain! Now, we are the history of the Future. We should not let them get away with their lies. Look at the date… 41 days before the occupation.
==================================
Published on Saturday, February 8, 2003 by the Daily Mirror/UK
Real Authors of Iraq Dossier Blast Blair
Exclusive By Gary Jones And Alexandra Williams In Los Angeles

JOURNALIST Sean Boyne and student Ibrahim al-Marashi have attacked Tony Blair for using their reports to call for war against Iraq.

A journalist holds a copy of a dossier setting out British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s case for military action against Iraq outside number 10 Downing Street in London, in this September 24, 2002 file photo. The government says it stands by the dossier, after academics said whole passages had been lifted from magazine articles, complete with spelling mistakes. REUTERS/ Dan Chung

Mr Boyne, who works for military magazine Jane’s Intelligence Review, said he was shocked his work had been used in the Government’s dossier.

Articles he wrote in 1997 were plagiarized for a 19-page intelligence document entitled Iraq: Its Infrastructure Of Concealment, Deception And Intimidation to add weight to the PM’s warmongering.

He said: “I don’t like to think that anything I wrote has been used for an argument for war. I am concerned because I am against the war.”

The other main source was a thesis by post-graduate student, Ibrahim al-Marashi, the US-born son of Iraqis, who lives in California. His research was partly based on documents seized in the 1991 Gulf War.

He said: “This is wholesale deception. How can the British public trust the Government if it is up to these sort of tricks? People will treat any other information they publish with a lot of skepticism from now on.”

As a mother with a son who has twice been in Iraq and is due to go to Afghanistan next year, what Mr Bacevich is saying makes complete and total sense to me. I am also a member of Military Families Speak Out, an organization of family members of people in the military, and dedicated to a withdrawl from both Iraq and Afghanistan. Thank you Mr Bacevich for articulating so very clearly what is wrong with our current foreign policy, and in what way it needs to change. Would that there were many more like you.

Great Post cecilia

But where is the Outrage?

Mr. Bacevich is a lovely man; but which one is closer to the truth?
a) We invaded Iraq due to mistakes?
b) We invaded Iraq due to Lies?

Whoever L-i-e-d, should be held accountable to the fullest extent for the N00000 of lives that have been lost.

N = 2-6 or 9. Who cares?
Why? Because human casualty is not a concern any more. We don’t care. We don’t seek accountability!

My outrage is with your constant BS Lilya. You don’t own this forum. Please stop telling people how to think, your a 26 year old kid with a limited amount of experience.
How is that I’m on the wrong side of of the issues? I’m on the wrong side of “your issues”. You need to study up on debating and rational thinking.

Your entitled to your opinions but this nonsense you call “the Public Investigative Journalism Project” is not what this forum is for. Again please start your own blog!

Putney,

If you kindly post your findings, proof, insider news about when and how these people ever ever tried to sell us a war for “Oil” I am all ears. You don’t know me.

I spent months in dark corners of Gaza between Hamas militiants, as their sister. I already know more about the occupation than you will ever know.

Do some constructive work, will you?

Lilya I rest my case your an immature zealot with a axe to grind. Do your own work start your own blog.

Post my findings? What for? Your mind is already made up.

Lilya your also showing how immature you are. How your not able to debate or use critical thinking. You act like just because you were in Gaza your right. For all I know your making this up. You have no proof, your statements and rhetoric are punctuated with misinformation and propaganda.

I’m done with you by the way.