Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Pre-Bush build up for war in Iraq

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Jara sang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-05 01:55 PM
Original message
Pre-Bush build up for war in Iraq
These clips explain how President Clinton was trying to contain Saddam Hussein's weapons capabilities. How weapons inspectors were used as "spotters" for future bombing campaigns. The death and carnage the Iraqi people suffered due to bombing and sanctions. How the Iraqi populace in desperation turned to more extreme Islamist position. And U.S. officials who thought that taking Saddam Hussein out of power would destabilize the region. The articles were obtained from the website of the Association of Former Intelligence Officers.


IRAQ - There is international controversy about Iraq's remaining CBW capabilities and corollary inspections and sanctions, integrally connected with US intelligence capabilities and analyses. A US summary on Iraq's alleged "Program of Mass Destruction" is contained in a National Security Council fact sheet released by the White House on 14 November 1997. The fact sheet indicates (1) an overwhelming (almost total) percentage of attributed and known Iraqi chemical warfare, biological weapons, nuclear, and missile equipment, facilities and capabilities have been destroyed, (2) that some stockpiles unilaterally claimed to have been destroyed by the Iraqis remain unverified and need continuing attention, and (3) that "technical expertise" to produce some biological agents continues to exist. This latter "technical expertise" is presumably being targeted by US intelligence for the apparently planned US and UK air strikes, for ultimately Iraq's CBW capability depends on a technologically sophisticated elite in this country ruled by the secular Ba'ath party. If the technical, research and educational infrastructure is destroyed, and as many Iraqi researchers killed as possible, little capability will remain (bombed back into the stone age). The political diplomatic message to Iraq is clear: there will be relentless US pressure until Sadam Hussein -- who made bombastic and irresponsible chemical warfare threats towards the dominant regional Nuclear Weapon/CBW power, Israel -- is overthrown as President, to prevent even greater regional harm and to maintain the regional status quo. Other news articles reflect foreign concern over US policy, and include Russian and French initiatives offering technical intelligence experts and reconnaissance platforms and advocating a gradual end or lessening of sanctions on humanistic grounds.

To gain a different perspective on the Iraqi situation seldom reflected in popular mass media propaganda, several Roman Catholic bishops have just begun a hunger strike and have appealed to President Clinton to end the sanctions against Iraq. "I have never seen such devastation and suffering" said Auxiliary bishop Thomas Gumbleton of Detroit, who visited Iraq last year. "Sanctions have taken the lives of well over 1 million persons, 60 percent of whom are children under 5 years of age... The bombing campaign destroyed electric, water and sewage plants, as well as agricultural, food and medical production facilities. All continue to be inoperative, or function as sub-minimal levels." The bishops represent humanistic concerns - how much suffering is enough? US policy obviously transcends these considerations and must deal with the whole range of disastrous potentials of new CBW technologies in the "wrong" hands. Given a responsible Iraqi leadership situtation, one could speculate that US and allied intelligence would be able to deal quite adequately with the currently remaining Iraqi capabilities.

http://www.afio.com/sections/wins/1998/notes03.html


IRAQ BOMBING: Intelligence targeting for the impending US bombing campaign should benefit from the years of inspections of Iraqi facilities. The President stated that the political objective of the strikes was to reduce or delay Iraq's capabilities to develop "weapons of mass destruction" or to deliver them on their neighbors. The media target list attributed to White House sources includes suspected weapons facilities - a category that may include anything from research laboratories to fertilizer producers to actual weapons plants - air defenses, command bunkers and presidential palaces, in addition to Republican Guard assets, to be taken out in a three-day campaign. A considerable number of collateral civilian casualties can be expected. Commentaries on the planned targeting strategies reflect the usual allegations of quarrels among the military services about who should do what and when.Reports from Iraq indicate that the long years of US/UN sanctions have had a destabilizing effect on the secular Iraqi middle class and has caused much deprivation among the lower classes. There is a resurgence of Islam, as desperation drives people to religion. In addition, almost inconceivable after their bloody war between them, the first steps towards a reconciliation between Iran and Iraq have been reported. Iran is backing Iraq in its confrontation with the US. Huge barriers remain between the two states, but Middle East intelligence sources are quoted as stating that Iraq now needs such an alliance, and that Iran has given up on the US changing its "dual containment" policy. (Sources: WPost & WTimes 1 - 7 Feb98, The Economist).

http://www.afio.com/sections/wins/1998/notes05.html


U.S. ANTI-SADDAM MEASURES - The recent U.S. congress authorization of $97 million for surplus military equipment and training for the "Iraqi opposition" has been greeted with less than enthusiastic support by those more knowledgeable than the general American public about the situation on the the ground in Iraq. The "experts" agree with the Congressional sentiment, but otherwise concur with General Zenni, the Marine at the head of CENTCOM, who disagreed with the Congressional action. His grounds were that the Iraqi opposition factions are so fragmented and disorganized that to install one might even be more inimical to U.S. interests than having Saddam in place.

http://www.afio.com/sections/wins/1998/notes46.html


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Jara sang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-05 02:21 PM
Response to Original message
1. Iraq clearly posed no threat to the U.S. when Bush took power in 2000
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Toots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-05 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Did Iraq ever in it's entire existence pose a threat to the USA?
If so then we are not what we have always thought we were.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jara sang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-05 02:58 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. The neocons vision of perpetual war has seen to that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-05 03:26 PM
Response to Original message
4. Great find Jara Sang. Unfortunately, the politicians prefer ignoring it.
CYA supercedes the truth and/or ethics every time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 05:24 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC