Sharon's blackmailed Bush and blair into invading Iraq?

[Emillereid]

Just accidentally came up this while looking for something else. Anybody think it has any credibility as the real reason we invaded when we did?

May 17, 2004

neocons go-between for Bush blackmail (#16671)
by DE Teodoru on August 17, 2003 at 7:44 PM



The DEBKA.file is written by an Israeli group that has
befriended several Mossad and Shin Bet operatives and
is at times "fed" scoops by the Israeli PM's office.
It is therefore hard to pick the wheat from the chaff
without parallel assets. But a most telling series of
reports are its accounts of Hizzbollah accumulation of
rockets in Southern Lebanon. That, more than any
arguments about weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) may
help to explain why President Bush seemed to have
become impatient in March and launched an invasion of
Iraq after giving Saddam 48 hrs. to get out of
Baghdad. This Bush did, even though, according to
Russo-Franco-Brit intelligence reports, the
choreographed maneuvers of US troops in the desert on
the Iraq-Kuwait border were dissolving the Ba'athist
regime in fearful anticipation.

Why was Bush suddenly in such a rush? The nuclear WMDs
threat mentioned by Bush and the "45-min. interval to
devastation" of Blair were "sexy" inventions, that may
have hidden the real issues at play. Barton Gellman et
al, in a very elaborate account in the Washington Post
(8/10/03) entitled: "Deception of Threat Outgrew
Supporting Evidence," presented a case against the
evidence for nuclear WMDs. We know of Saddam's
tactical bio-chemical weapons from their use. But
these are meaningless against America's multimegaton
nuclear devises and its inescapable delivery systems.
But an unsubstantiated case was made for a nuclear
threat-- where there was none-- a case, according to
Gellman et al, that was deliberate and of long
duration. Why?

It is here that DEBKA.file's reports on Hezbollah
rockets comes in. It turns out, according to Gellman
et al, that the smoking gun-- "aluminum tubes"-- were
not meant for centrifuges that separate out enriched
uranium for nuclear bombs, but as components for the
Italian Medussa 81 rocket, whose blueprints the Iraqis
had acquired. Such medium range rockets were believed
by Israel to be intended for mass production, armed
with bio-chemical WMDs for delivery to all anti-Israel
guerrillas. Sharon, apparently threatened to take
immediate action unless Bush, within 48 hrs. invades
and disarms Iraq. Since the production and storage
areas were dispersed so that Israel did not know
precisely where they were, Israel would need to engage
in a massive preemptive nuclear bombardment of Iraq in
order to sanitize it and avoid becoming victim of a
first strike. This would result in a devastating
Mideast conflagration. To avoid this, Bush grafted on
to his administration the Sharon argument for acting
abruptly. However, to make it credible, the regional
nuclear threat from an Israeli first strike, he
attributed to Iraq. The Syrian disarmament of
Hezbollah in Lebanon of Iraqi missiles after the
invasion, it is said, supports this argument. ......


http://hnn.us/readcomment.php?id=16671

[H2O Man]

1. Bush planned to attack Iraq

while running for president. His backers/administration had it planned for eight years.