1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Bush-Blair Iraq war memo revealed

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by anarres, Mar 29, 2006.

  1. EdwardTking

    EdwardTking Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2002
    Messages:
    3,794
    Location:
    Norfolk
    George Bush I sent an army to remove Saddam from Kuwait.

    He foolishly granted a cease fire leaving Saddam in charge, thinking that the loss of face would result in Saddam being overthrown.

    However George Bush I's army went home and Saddam remained the President of Iraq, and merely by staying in power there, against the wishes of the hyper-power, was accorded a victory.
    Then George Bush I lost the presidential election to Bill Clinton.

    So Saddam thinks I remain President!!, while Bush has gone~~.

    George Bush II is not the most intellectual President around, but he is not stupid. He knows that if the USA withdrew leaving Saddam in power for 2nd time, the world would laugh Ha Ha at him and USA.

    Having ordered the army to deploy to the Middle East, he can not withdraw leaving Saddam still in power in Iraq. The embargo would have fallen, and Saddam would no doubt resume the WMD program.

    While George Bush II may have wanted to go to war for many years, the decision was irrevocably made when the US congress and senate nodded through the decision to have the army start to load its tanks on ships etc which was made many months before. Only the asassination, death, resignation or surrender of Saddam could have prevented it.

    The UN discussions were just about officially recognising a US decision.
     
  2. nonconformist

    nonconformist Miserable

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2003
    Messages:
    18,740
    Location:
    Canterbury
    Au contraire, Edward, I believe Bush wasn't as stupid as his son, and knew that taking Saddam out would open the region to factional disintegration and civil war.
     
  3. EdwardTking

    EdwardTking Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2002
    Messages:
    3,794
    Location:
    Norfolk
    A very valid perspective.


    But unlike his father, George Bush II got re-elected.

    What has to be remembered is that Iraq was an artificial
    and not a natural state. So I think that if the USA had
    properly played its hand, it would have been able to make
    any factional disintegration and civil war work for it.

    I.e. (1) shoot Saddam upon capture, (2) don't waste time
    trying to establish a US military government or appoint
    an interim Iraqi government, call (3) immediate elections
    and (4) withdraw to Kuwait and just a few desert bases.

    If responsible government is established, then USA can deal
    with that as a sovereign entity. But if instead civil war, then
    US separately recognise partitions and extend influence.

    As it is USA is now in the peculiar position of trying to support a
    hopelessly divided but nominally national Iraqi government to hold
    together an Iraqi state (which if successful, won't thank them)
    by maintaining their presence there against wishes of most Iraqis
    and not necessarily within the long term interests of the USA.
     
  4. Riesstiu IV

    Riesstiu IV Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2003
    Messages:
    4,230
    Location:
    USA
    :twitch: *Brain explodes*
     
  5. Sidhe

    Sidhe Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Messages:
    12,987
    Location:
    England
    No **** Sherlock ;) a friend of mine( Seargeant in the army) was ordered to prepare to go to war in the gulf six months before the war began, this is not news it's affirmation of what you should of already known.
     
  6. Red Stranger

    Red Stranger Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2005
    Messages:
    1,678
    What is wrong with discussing war strategies two months before the actual campaign? Surely you don't expect the president to just go in without a plan. You don't win a war that way.
     
  7. FriendlyFire

    FriendlyFire Codex WMDicanious

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    18,189
    Location:
    Sydney
    How come they didnt use the "Future of Iraq project" Which planned for a post war iraq since the days of Gulf1 ????

    instead they went with rumsfield and wolfwitez "fantasy" postwar iraq plan :rolleyes:
     
  8. Riesstiu IV

    Riesstiu IV Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2003
    Messages:
    4,230
    Location:
    USA
    Ummm, is that a response to me? My Brain exploded as a result of confusion between the two posters, not on the information contained in the post.
     
  9. Desmond Hawkins

    Desmond Hawkins Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2002
    Messages:
    9,922
    Do you have any sources about this "Future of Iraq Project"? Just out of curiousity.
     
  10. Kayak

    Kayak Partisan

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    2,236
    Location:
    Upside down
    I submit that that only reason that Bush II got re-elected was that the war was on (and in too early a stage to definitively see how badly it hed been bungled), a war which was coincidently made possible only by 9/11.

    Without 9/11 Bush would have gone nowhere.
     
  11. Irish Caesar

    Irish Caesar Yellow Jacket

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Messages:
    10,278
    Location:
    Atlanta, former CSA
    True, but people might not have had any reason to vote him out in 2004 without the Iraq ordeal.
     
  12. Kayak

    Kayak Partisan

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    2,236
    Location:
    Upside down
    I dissagree. Remember that not one of his proposed programs was getting through Congress and the people were, by and large, agaist his tax cuts. The economy was still pretty shaky in 04 too. But would have, shouls have, could haves are hard to discuss on this one since it did happen so early in his presidency. His poll numbers befor 9/11 were horrible iirc.
     
  13. I am the Future

    I am the Future Oi Oi Oi !!!

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    2,261
    Location:
    Western Spiral Arm of the Galaxy
    I read about this a couple months ago...
    Thats why less main stream news is better.
     
  14. cgannon64

    cgannon64 BOB DYLAN'S ROCKIN OUT!

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2002
    Messages:
    19,213
    Location:
    Hipster-Authorland, Brooklyn (Hell)
    Whaaat? You mean world leaders only use diplomacy when it's in their interest??? :crazyeye: :crazyeye: :crazyeye:
     
  15. FriendlyFire

    FriendlyFire Codex WMDicanious

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    18,189
    Location:
    Sydney
    The directors of "future of iraq project" essentially resigned and went public.
    i believe that he was interviewed on the "news hour" as well as several members collaerating on a book.
     
  16. MobBoss

    MobBoss Off-Topic Overlord

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    Messages:
    46,853
    Location:
    In Perpetual Motion
    Not sure I would agree with that Kayak.

    Without 9/11 the airline industry wouldnt have taken the hit it did. Jobs would not have been lost.

    Undoubtedly, the economy would have been even better than it was during the election.

    The wars would not have happened. The debt wouldnt be so bad. The democrats still woudnt have a platform.

    I humbly submit that Bush's low ratings are a direct result of the fallout of 9/11 some years hence. Without 9/11 I doubt he would be so disliked.
     
  17. Merlin

    Merlin The Ruler

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    215
    Location:
    Helsinki, Finland
    They were not discussing war strategies. They were trying to find excuses to go to an unjustified war.
     
  18. BasketCase

    BasketCase Username sez it all

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Messages:
    13,024
    Location:
    Closer than you'd like
    My desire to see Saddam deposed had nothing to do with getting the UN's permission to do it. If 5 billion people say 2 + 2 = 5, I will happily tell the entire planet to go to hell, and stroll off my own way.

    The world community currently seems to prefer stability over freedom, and that's just wrong. Since the world community's collective opinion changes now and then, that will thankfully not be the case forever(though it could take an entire generation).
     
  19. Red Stranger

    Red Stranger Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2005
    Messages:
    1,678
    I second that.
     
  20. anarres

    anarres anarchist revolutionary

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Messages:
    6,069
    Location:
    www.civ3duelzone.com
    So they have "freedom" in Afghanistan and Iraq now? :crazyeye:

    What does "freedom" mean? Free to be shot, free to be kidnapped, free to be blown up at market? Free to be in the middle of a civil war?

    I'm not convinced this "freedom" you speak of is so great.
     

Share This Page