Bush/Cheney Ignored 9/11 Warnings Then Hid The Fact....

Amongst the Ani

Read Tenets book. He claims to have told Bush/Cheney many times that they needed a plan for an insurgency before the invasion of Iraq. We would be welcome with open arms but after a short period we would be seen as invaders. History supported his theory. Bush/Cheney discounted him and never even read the paper he wrote up on it. Now Tenet wrote that book after the fact but if true just leads me to believe Bush probably blew off the intel 9/11 would happen. In Bush's defense Tenet in his book says no one saw 9/11 coming. They received intel like this all the time and didn't put the pieces together until it was too late. I wonder why the change of story now. He was also very, very favorable to Clinton who made him director.

Bentleyspop

Amongst the Ani said:

Read Tenets book. He claims to have told Bush/Cheney many times that they needed a plan for an insurgency before the invasion of Iraq. We would be welcome with open arms but after a short period we would be seen as invaders. History supported his theory. Bush/Cheney discounted him and never even read the paper he wrote up on it. Now Tenet wrote that book after the fact but if true just leads me to believe Bush probably blew off the intel 9/11 would happen. In Bush's defense Tenet in his book says no one saw 9/11 coming. They received intel like this all the time and didn't put the pieces together until it was too late. I wonder why the change of story now. He was also very, very favorable to Clinton who made him director.

It was quite clear from the beginning that while cheney/rove had a plan to get to Baghdad they never had a plan to get out.
They expected the Iraqis to be lining the streets and greeting the Americans with flowers, candy, and hugs and to then go about living their lives as if nothing happened. They did not for one second expect an insurgency or any kind of pushback once they got to Baghdad.

polaris_x

people still think the invasion of iraq was a good thing and that the ouster of saddam was good?

sad ... no wonder douchebags like Carson and Trump can lead polls ...

every fucking problem we have with extremists starts with good ole' US foreign policy ... whether it's Iran, Iraq, Al Qaeda, ISIS or whatever else comes up ... at this point - it should be blatantly obvious that the world's biggest threats are clearly a function of the economic imperialistic policies of the US ...

HughFreakingDillon

polaris_x said:

people still think the invasion of iraq was a good thing and that the ouster of saddam was good?

sad ... no wonder douchebags like Carson and Trump can lead polls ...

every fucking problem we have with extremists starts with good ole' US foreign policy ... whether it's Iran, Iraq, Al Qaeda, ISIS or whatever else comes up ... at this point - it should be blatantly obvious that the world's biggest threats are clearly a function of the economic imperialistic policies of the US ...

can you imagine what the US would do if Iraq bombed and killed 1,000,000 of their civilians and hung their president in a backroom and presenting it as liberating them?

World War 3, 4, and 5 all rolled into one.

mickeyrat

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Bentleyspop said:

This is old news.

However, for those blaming bush, you've got the wrong guy.

He is to blame for nothing as he was never aware of anything.

Blame should fall on those actually in charge...

Cheney
Rove
Rumsfeld
Powell
Etc

He truly was a mindless, helpless gerbil. A compliant puppet.

I can't help feel that much of the Obama bashing is residual guilt on the part of some that promoted Bush. They truly understand what a weakling they backed and, with egg on their face, they attempt to discredit Obama to regain some of their dignity: "Look... the guy you voted for sucks too! We're all stupid!"

I don't think invading Iraq, taking out Saddam and seeing the surge through is the sign of a weakling. The man as part of the Anbar awakening was turning enemies into allies and triggered the green revolution. The AMT can hate all they want but the man at least had a strategy for setting the middle east right. Now all we have are discarded gains and rudderless leadership masquerading as soft, liberal idealism. So no guilt here...just general feelings of disgust.

Whats this we shit? Arent you canadian? There aint we neighbor.

Drowned Out

polaris_x said:

people still think the invasion of iraq was a good thing and that the ouster of saddam was good?

sad ... no wonder douchebags like Carson and Trump can lead polls ...

every fucking problem we have with extremists starts with good ole' US foreign policy ... whether it's Iran, Iraq, Al Qaeda, ISIS or whatever else comes up ... at this point - it should be blatantly obvious that the world's biggest threats are clearly a function of the economic imperialistic policies of the US ...

Yes......underneath the screams for the obliteration of ISIS, the goal of regime change in Syria remains unchanged....Intentionally repeating the situation in Iraq. Another power vacuum. resulting in a salafist principality (caliphate)...this has been the openly acknowledged US/allied plan for Syria all along.... But in 10 years, when things have continued to devolve, we'll be bickering about which former POTUS is to blame for the current 'quagmire', how we never saw this coming, or how we did, but just didn't bomb them long enough....gearing up for war against the latest enemy of freedom. How people fail to see the patterns, how they are so easily propagandized to support military actions without asking 'what happens after that?', how resistant they are to trying different approaches, is beyond me. Worse are the people who see the patterns yet still think we have a divine right to 'set the Middle East right' despite the suffering our righteousness inflicts directly in those nations, and via 'blowback' against our own people.

callen

Yea

polaris_x said:

people still think the invasion of iraq was a good thing and that the ouster of saddam was good?

sad ... no wonder douchebags like Carson and Trump can lead polls ...

every fucking problem we have with extremists starts with good ole' US foreign policy ... whether it's Iran, Iraq, Al Qaeda, ISIS or whatever else comes up ... at this point - it should be blatantly obvious that the world's biggest threats are clearly a function of the economic imperialistic policies of the US ...

So pretty clear I fucking hate war mongers but US not entirely responsible. Made it easier to recruit for sure.

Blame humans instinctual needs to be a member of a tribe and insecurities of having a somewhat of a conscience mind and being scared to death trying to figure out "why". Fuck gods and religion.

polaris_x

callen said:

Yea

So pretty clear I fucking hate war mongers but US not entirely responsible. Made it easier to recruit for sure.

Blame humans instinctual needs to be a member of a tribe and insecurities of having a somewhat of a conscience mind and being scared to death trying to figure out "why". Fuck gods and religion.

for sure there are complicit partners politically but the military industrial complex, war profiteering and oil has had the most influence on US foreign policy ... if you look at the "coalition of the willing" for iraq ... it's pretty much the US ... if you look at who's fucking around in the middle east the most - it's primarily the US ...

polaris_x

Drowned Out said:

Yes......underneath the screams for the obliteration of ISIS, the goal of regime change in Syria remains unchanged....Intentionally repeating the situation in Iraq. Another power vacuum. resulting in a salafist principality (caliphate)...this has been the openly acknowledged US/allied plan for Syria all along.... But in 10 years, when things have continued to devolve, we'll be bickering about which former POTUS is to blame for the current 'quagmire', how we never saw this coming, or how we did, but just didn't bomb them long enough....gearing up for war against the latest enemy of freedom. How people fail to see the patterns, how they are so easily propagandized to support military actions without asking 'what happens after that?', how resistant they are to trying different approaches, is beyond me. Worse are the people who see the patterns yet still think we have a divine right to 'set the Middle East right' despite the suffering our righteousness inflicts directly in those nations, and via 'blowback' against our own people.

and all it takes is marching out a vet at football games and parades to make sure the people continue to stay blind to what these men and women are sent overseas to do and for what reasons ...

mickeyrat

polaris_x said:

callen said:

Yea

So pretty clear I fucking hate war mongers but US not entirely responsible. Made it easier to recruit for sure.

Blame humans instinctual needs to be a member of a tribe and insecurities of having a somewhat of a conscience mind and being scared to death trying to figure out "why". Fuck gods and religion.

for sure there are complicit partners politically but the military industrial complex, war profiteering and oil has had the most influence on US foreign policy ... if you look at the "coalition of the willing" for iraq ... it's pretty much the US ... if you look at who's fucking around in the middle east the most - it's primarily the US ...

How many of the oil companies there are solely US based and owned companies?

mickeyrat

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2009/07/28/175574/iraq-because-rumsfeld-needed-better-targets/

BS44325

As long as we're discussing former CIA directors we should probably acknowledge that Director Brennan conceded that ISIS was decimated under Bush and had grown exponentially since the withdrawal.

http://www.aei.org/publication/brennan-admits-isis-was-decimated-under-bush-but-has-grown-under-obama-by-as-much-as-4400-percent/

Bentleyspop

BS44325 said:

As long as we're discussing former CIA directors we should probably acknowledge that Director Brennan conceded that ISIS was decimated under Bush and had grown exponentially since the withdrawal.

http://www.aei.org/publication/brennan-admits-isis-was-decimated-under-bush-but-has-grown-under-obama-by-as-much-as-4400-percent/

Correct me if I'm wrong but there was no Isis during the cheney/rove regime.

That isis grew out of the ashes of the elite iraqi army and baath party leaders. That they came into being 4 maybe 5 years ago.

So yes they grew exponentially during the Obama presidency but that they didn't exist 7 or 8 years ago.

mickeyrat

Bentleyspop said:

BS44325 said:

As long as we're discussing former CIA directors we should probably acknowledge that Director Brennan conceded that ISIS was decimated under Bush and had grown exponentially since the withdrawal.

http://www.aei.org/publication/brennan-admits-isis-was-decimated-under-bush-but-has-grown-under-obama-by-as-much-as-4400-percent/

Correct me if I'm wrong but there was no Isis during the cheney/rove regime.

That isis grew out of the ashes of the elite iraqi army and baath party leaders. That they came into being 4 maybe 5 years ago.

So yes they grew exponentially during the Obama presidency but that they didn't exist 7 or 8 years ago.

Aligned with AQI in 06. Essentially took it over and renamed itself IS among other names.

Wiki says ( i know) formed in jordan in 1999.

Others say it really formed and grew to what it is from US run Iraqi prisons.

g under p

mickeyrat said:

Bentleyspop said:

BS44325 said:

As long as we're discussing former CIA directors we should probably acknowledge that Director Brennan conceded that ISIS was decimated under Bush and had grown exponentially since the withdrawal.

http://www.aei.org/publication/brennan-admits-isis-was-decimated-under-bush-but-has-grown-under-obama-by-as-much-as-4400-percent/

Correct me if I'm wrong but there was no Isis during the cheney/rove regime.

That isis grew out of the ashes of the elite iraqi army and baath party leaders. That they came into being 4 maybe 5 years ago.

So yes they grew exponentially during the Obama presidency but that they didn't exist 7 or 8 years ago.

Aligned with AQI in 06. Essentially took it over and renamed itself IS among other names.

Wiki says ( i know) formed in jordan in 1999.

Others say it really formed and grew to what it is from US run Iraqi prisons.

Or Did Bush create Isis...?

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/did-george-w-bush-create-isis

Here is what happened: In 2003, the U.S. military, on orders of President Bush, invaded Iraq, and nineteen days later threw out Saddam’s government. A few days after that, President Bush or someone in his Administration decreed the dissolution of the Iraqi Army. This decision didn’t throw “thirty thousand individuals” out of a job, as Ziedrich said—the number was closer to ten times that. Overnight, at least two hundred and fifty thousand Iraqi men—armed, angry, and with military training—were suddenly humiliated and out of work.

This was probably the single most catastrophic decision of the American venture in Iraq. In a stroke, the Administration helped enable the creation of the Iraqi insurgency. Bush Administration officials involved in the decision—like Paul Bremer and Walter Slocombe—argued that they were effectively ratifying the reality that the Iraqi Army had already disintegrated.

This was manifestly not true. I talked to American military commanders who told me that leaders of entire Iraqi divisions (a division has roughly ten thousand troops) had come to them for instructions and expressed a willingness to coöperate. In fact, many American commanders argued vehemently at the time that the Iraqi military should be kept intact—that disbanding it would turn too many angry young men against the United States. But the Bush White House went ahead.

Many of those suddenly unemployed Iraqi soldiers took up arms against the United States. We’ll never know for sure how many Iraqis would have stayed in the Iraqi Army—and stayed peaceful—had it remained intact. But the evidence is overwhelming that former Iraqi soldiers formed the foundation of the insurgency.

On this point, although she understated the numbers, Ziedrich was exactly right. But how did the dissolution of the Iraqi Army lead to the creation of ISIS?

During the course of the war, Al Qaeda in Iraq grew to be the most powerful wing of the insurgency, as well as the most violent and the most psychotic. They drove truck bombs into mosques and weddings and beheaded their prisoners. But, by the time the last American soldiers had departed, in 2011, the Islamic State of Iraq, as it was then calling itself, was in a state of near-total defeat. The combination of the Iraqi-led “awakening,” along with persistent American pressure, had decimated the group and pushed them into a handful of enclaves.......

Peace

polaris_x

mickeyrat said:

How many of the oil companies there are solely US based and owned companies?

sure ... oil companies are multinationals ... the issue here is which country was willing to dictate their foreign policy in the interests of these multinationals!?? ... which country that maybe elected a former oil guy, an arms dealer and a war profiteering guy and put them in charge ...

Smellyman

polaris_x said:

Drowned Out said:

Yes......underneath the screams for the obliteration of ISIS, the goal of regime change in Syria remains unchanged....Intentionally repeating the situation in Iraq. Another power vacuum. resulting in a salafist principality (caliphate)...this has been the openly acknowledged US/allied plan for Syria all along.... But in 10 years, when things have continued to devolve, we'll be bickering about which former POTUS is to blame for the current 'quagmire', how we never saw this coming, or how we did, but just didn't bomb them long enough....gearing up for war against the latest enemy of freedom. How people fail to see the patterns, how they are so easily propagandized to support military actions without asking 'what happens after that?', how resistant they are to trying different approaches, is beyond me. Worse are the people who see the patterns yet still think we have a divine right to 'set the Middle East right' despite the suffering our righteousness inflicts directly in those nations, and via 'blowback' against our own people.

and all it takes is marching out a vet at football games and parades to make sure the people continue to stay blind to what these men and women are sent overseas to do and for what reasons ...

The PR/advertising for the armed forces is huge. Their budget must be 5x that of planned parenthood. That is all what is talked about during football games, the men and women fighting for our freedom.

It is almost like religious indoctrination of entire people. Instead of using religion to control a people, the US uses the military.

HughFreakingDillon

Smellyman said:

polaris_x said:

Drowned Out said:

Yes......underneath the screams for the obliteration of ISIS, the goal of regime change in Syria remains unchanged....Intentionally repeating the situation in Iraq. Another power vacuum. resulting in a salafist principality (caliphate)...this has been the openly acknowledged US/allied plan for Syria all along.... But in 10 years, when things have continued to devolve, we'll be bickering about which former POTUS is to blame for the current 'quagmire', how we never saw this coming, or how we did, but just didn't bomb them long enough....gearing up for war against the latest enemy of freedom. How people fail to see the patterns, how they are so easily propagandized to support military actions without asking 'what happens after that?', how resistant they are to trying different approaches, is beyond me. Worse are the people who see the patterns yet still think we have a divine right to 'set the Middle East right' despite the suffering our righteousness inflicts directly in those nations, and via 'blowback' against our own people.

and all it takes is marching out a vet at football games and parades to make sure the people continue to stay blind to what these men and women are sent overseas to do and for what reasons ...

The PR/advertising for the armed forces is huge. Their budget must be 5x that of planned parenthood. That is all what is talked about during football games, the men and women fighting for our freedom.

It is almost like religious indoctrination of entire people. Instead of using religion to control a people, the US uses the military.

the CFL does similar stuff. One of the announcers on TSN talks incessantly about our armed forces.

Smellyman

Googling around it seems the US Military spend about ONE BILLION DOLLARS on marketing.

Hearts and minds through jingles and propaganda.

mickeyrat

Smellyman said:

Googling around it seems the US Military spend about ONE BILLION DOLLARS on marketing.

Hearts and minds through jingles and propaganda.

Couple that with the cost overruns of various systems in development tell me again why we cant do better by vets and everyone else?