My Unfinished 9/11 Business

[MrScorpio]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/06/us/sept-11-reckoning/keller.html?_r=2&hp

By BILL KELLER
Published: September 6, 2011

Ten years after the attacks, we memorialize the loss and we mark the heroism, but there is no organized remembrance of the other feelings that day aroused: the bewilderment, the vulnerability, the impotence. It may be difficult to recall with our attention now turned inward upon a faltering economy, but the suddenly apparent menace of the world awakened a bellicose surge of mission and made hawks of many — including me — who had a lifelong wariness of the warrior reflex.

When the planes hit, I was beginning a new life in the opinion department, an elevator ride up from the newsroom that I had served as a Times reporter and editor for 17 years. My debut was not for a couple of weeks, and I was laboring on a nice, safe essay about Western water rights. As the ash cloud spread, I set off on foot through the dazed city, feeling more than a little pointless, until I was summoned by my new boss to write. Something. Now.

-snip-

During the months of public argument about how to deal with Saddam Hussein, I christened an imaginary association of pundits the I-Can’t-Believe-I’m-a-Hawk Club, made up of liberals for whom 9/11 had stirred a fresh willingness to employ American might. It was a large and estimable group of writers and affiliations, including, among others, Thomas Friedman of The Times; Fareed Zakaria, of Newsweek; George Packer and Jeffrey Goldberg of The New Yorker; Richard Cohen of The Washington Post; the blogger Andrew Sullivan; Paul Berman of Dissent; Christopher Hitchens of just about everywhere; and Kenneth Pollack, the former C.I.A. analyst whose book, “The Threatening Storm,” became the liberal manual on the Iraqi threat. (Yes, it is surely relevant that this is exclusively a boys’ club.)

In several columns I laid out justifications for overthrowing Saddam Hussein. There were caveats — most significantly, that there was no reason to rush, that we should hold off to see whether Iraq’s behavior could be sufficiently contained by sanctions and inspections. Like many liberal hawks, I was ambivalent; Pollack said he was 55 to 45 for war, which feels about right.

[Eddie Haskell]

1. Ah yes, the monster excuse.

"For many of us, the monster argument was potent, even if it was not sufficient. Hussein’s genocidal persecution of the Kurds, the Grand Guignol of his prisons and the memory of his savage assault on Kuwait all confirmed him as the beastliest of despots."

As each justification for the war was proven false, a new argument was presented. Why didn't these guys realize it wasn't about WMDs or Saddam. It was, and always had been about control of ME oil reserves.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Eddie Haskell]

5. Yes I do.

We're only interested in the oily-mons; preferably virgin light, sweet crude.

[truebrit71]

6. 9/11 was cynically used as a means to an end...

...invading Iraq had absolutely fuck all to do with al-Q, WMD or 9-11, but the compliant whores in the M$M did their bit to gin up support and tar and feather anyone that stood up against the march to war...The impending belch of false patriotism about the events on that day from the very same presstitutes will be enough to make me :puke:

[metalbot]

7. The counter argument for "it's all about the oil" is economic

We don't "control" Iraqi oil. They sell it on the free market - something that Saddam Hussein would have been happy to continue doing. As OPEC members, they can continue to control production in exactly the same way that they do today. Had we lifted sanctions, US companies would have come swooping in to Iraq to restore oil production that had been down since the first Gulf War.

I can make a deeper argument that it was about oil that runs something like this: Saudi Arabia and Iraq are the two largest oil producers. Sometime in the next 20 years (from 2001), the House of Saud will collapse, leading to civil war in Saudi Arabia. This would effectively shut down production in the largest oil producing country. Problematically, it's unlikely that Hussein's sons would be successful in assuming the mantle of power, and Hussein would likely also die in the next 20 years. If civil wars occurred in both Saudi Arabia and Iraq at the same time, oil prices would skyrocket. To avoid this scenario, you could choose to intervene and topple one of the countries now. Saddam was the easier choice, even though the 9/11 attackers were all Saudi.

[Eddie Haskell]

8. Nov. 2000, what currency was Iraq accepting for its oil?

June 2003, what currency was Iraq accepting for its oil?

[NNN0LHI]

3. I don't like or trust Bill Keller or the NYT any more

Anyone who couldn't recognize and put an end to what Judith Miller was doing is not worth anyone's trust ever again.

I didn't trust them when it was happening and I certainly don't trust them now.

Don

[hang a left]

4. Man, when I clicked on your thread I had no idea....

What a bunch of crap.

This whole 10 year thing has gotten me a little riled up.

God! Has it been 10 years?

Those bastards!

Who would have ever known the excuses and abuses that would be done in the name of 9-11. That *shadow government* kind of operation. I never saw it coming. Do you think we have 10 more years?

[tomg]

9. For the first time in my life

I wrote a letter to the Times in response to an article ( which I seriously doubt will ever be published). They asked us to respond to "what you think we achieved in Iraq and afghanistan." what I suggested is that the better question is what did They achieve. My suggestion was exactly what they set out to do: the destruction and looting of Irag, Afghanistan and the US. The destruction of civil liberties at home and abroad along a tangled road that leads from Abu Ghraib all the way through Michigan and to Wisconsin.

I can't recall when an apparent mea culpable of sorts so deeply angered me.

Edited to add: september 11, 2001 was just September 11, 1973 in slow motion. It is still going on.