Bush-Blair Iraq war memo revealed

[EdwardTking]

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.

 

[nonconformist]

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.

 

[EdwardTking]

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.

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.

 

[Riesstiu IV]

Iraq was such an obvious threat to everyone that we were willing to make up evidence to go to war with them! Just more proof that this is the most logical and consistent administration of all time.

Iraq was such an obvious threat to everyone that we were willing to make up evidence to go to war with them! Just more proof that this is the most logical and consistent administration of all time.

*Brain explodes*

 

[Sidhe]

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.

 

[Red Stranger]

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.

 

[FriendlyFire]

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.

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

 

[Riesstiu IV]

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.

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.

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

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

Do you have any sources about this "Future of Iraq Project"? Just out of curiousity.

 

[Kayak]

A very valid perspective.


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

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.

 

[Irish Caesar]

Without 9/11 Bush would have gone nowhere.

True, but people might not have had any reason to vote him out in 2004 without the Iraq ordeal.

 

[Kayak]

True, but people might not have had any reason to vote him out in 2004 without the Iraq ordeal.

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.

 

[I am the Future]

I read about this a couple months ago...
Thats why less main stream news is better.

 

[cgannon64]

Whaaat? You mean world leaders only use diplomacy when it's in their interest???

 

[FriendlyFire]

Do you have any sources about this "Future of Iraq Project"? Just out of curiousity.

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.

 

[MobBoss]

Without 9/11 Bush would have gone nowhere.

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.

 

[Merlin]

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.

They were not discussing war strategies. They were trying to find excuses to go to an unjustified war.

 

[BasketCase]

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).

 

[Red Stranger]

The world community currently seems to prefer stability over freedom, and that's just wrong.

I second that.

 

[anarres]

So they have "freedom" in Afghanistan and Iraq now?

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.