By Douglas Herman
10-21-5
Few know why we went. Those who do are not talking. Yet.
The real reason the US went to Iraq had little to do with democracy. Only fools who believe we have democracy here in America, believe we went to Iraq to spread democracy. Democracy, unlike manure and rumors, isn't spread, it's nurtured rather than fertilized.
Former CIA analyst, Ray McGovern said the Iraq war "has nothing to do with democracy or freedom or defending our way of life, it is to do with enriching the pockets of those who support this administration."
We went to Iraq for oil, empire and Israel, in no particular order. Not incidentally, we also went there so a select few, influential friends of those in power, could make a whole lot of money. And of course, we went there to wreck things so American taxpayers and Iraqi citizens could be doubly billed: once for wrecking them and once again for repairing them.
"The War on Terrorism benefits the arms/security/surveillance/oil industries, Bechtel, Halliburton, the Carlyle Group," commented Carol Brouillet.
Benefits and rewards them with no bid contracts. Benefits and rewards them by allowing no oversight on those contracts, by allowing the sole bidders the luxury to fulfill their contract at whatever cost--or not.
For example, an Iraqi woman detailed the depth of these corrupt practices in her thought-provoking link, The Promise and the Threat
"One of my cousins works in a prominent engineering company in Baghdad- we'll call the company H. This company is well-known for designing and building bridges all over Iraq. My cousin, a structural engineer, is a bridge freak. He spends hours talking about pillars and trusses and steel structures to anyone who'll listen. As May was drawing to a close, his manager told him that someone from the CPA wanted the company to estimate the building costs of replacing the New Diyala Bridge on the South East end of Baghdad. He got his team together, they went out and assessed the damage, decided it wasn't too extensive, but it would be costly. They did the necessary tests and analyses (mumblings about soil composition and water depth, expansion joints and girders) and came up with a number they tentatively put forward- $300,000. This included new plans and designs, raw materials (quite cheap in Iraq), labor, contractors, travel expenses, etc. Let's pretend my cousin is a dolt. Let's pretend he hasn't been working with bridges for over 17 years. Let's pretend he didn't work on replacing at least 20 of the 133 bridges damaged during the first Gulf War. Let's pretend he's wrong and the cost of rebuilding this bridge is four times the number they estimated- let's pretend it will actually cost $1,200,000. Let's just use our imagination. A week later, the New Diyala Bridge contract was given to an American company. This particular company estimated the cost of rebuilding the bridge would be around- brace yourselves---$50,000,000 !!"
Fifty million US taxpayer dollars for a million dollar bridge? Sounds about right for the current, corrupt administrations of America and their puppets in Iraq.
We went to Iraq for oil, empire and Israel. But mostly we went so a whole bunch of Bush buddies could make a helluva lot of money, soaking the public. As Condi Rice admitted, we could be in Iraq another ten years. Imagine the profits; Empire doesn't come cheap.
We also went to Iraq at the instigation of religious gangsters. Ours not theirs. We went so foreign and domestic religious leaders, who have far more say in our government than you or I, could hasten along their dream of a poisoned Middle-Eastern kingdom to entice some messiah to come back and reward them for their efforts. Enraptured, these Judeo-Christian jihadists envision a holy war, with plentiful profits along the way.
We went there for Israel. We went there to effectively destroy Israel's sworn enemies, despite the denials of numerous media honchos.
Joel Mobray wrote: "Discussing the Iraq war with the Washington Post former General Anthony Zinni took the path chosen by so many anti-Semites: he blamed it on the Jews ...Technically, the former head of the Central Command in the Middle East didn't say 'Jews.' He instead used a term that has become a new favorite for anti-Semites: 'neoconservatives'."
Does the war with Iraq, or future wars with Syria or Iran or Pakistan, benefit the average US citizen--or Israel? Before the war, General Zinni was one of the very few high level commanders with any experience in the Middle East. Zinni dared speak his mind to Washington and to the American media, not that anybody listened.
We went to Iraq the way Mallory went to Mt. Everest: because it's there. We went for the glory. We went to rewrite American history with neocon names writ large with hubris and with the unfortunate ignorance of history. We went to Iraq with the bodies of American soldiers who naively trusted their leaders. We went for empire cleverly disguised as patriotism.
We went to Iraq to rid the world of Saddam and slowly became Saddam ourselves. We went to free the imprisoned, relieve the tortured, and stuck around to imprison and torture ourselves! We went for a few good reasons, but many more bad ones slowly becoming worse.
And, of course, we went to Iraq to make a whole lot of money in the process for a select few.
Since the Iraq war began the price of gas at the pumps had nearly tripled for consumers. Oil profits in that time measure in the tens of billions. While families sacrifice--wartime usually meant sacrifice--the oil industry reaped windfall bonanzas (Hurricanes don't hurt either). The oil-soaked White House, well connected to the oil industry, may intentionally have bumbled the Iraq war to perpetually benefit big oil with "scarcities." Few know exactly. Those who do are not talking. They're too busy counting all that money.
Pragmatists may claim, with more than a shred of truth, that the US had to invade and occupy the Middle East to erect a fortress around the petroleum resources there. To insure a steady supply of the lubricant that allows the entire creaky machine to function. The theory of Peak Oil is holy writ to them. Thus the patriotism of self-preservation for the American way-of-life outweighs any moral arguments. The need for oil, not just for today or tomorrow but for the next century, necessitates the perpetuation of the American empire, by hook or by crook or by pre-emptive strike.
Like a Trojan horse, democracy was a false gift to the Iraqi people. Inside were the real reasons, fully armed and ready to plunder. Democracy was an afterthought for the thirty-month military occupation of Iraq. Indeed, if democracy truly existed, the Iraqis would have quickly voted us out of Iraq.
And if democracy existed in American, criminal indictments and the impeachment of the president would have occurred long ago. For lying the country into the Middle East, for wasting men, money and materials for the enrichment of a few people connected to the administration. For oil, empire and Israel.
Few know the exact reasons we went to war with Iraq. Those who do are not talking. Yet.
Few know why we went. Those who do are not talking. Yet.
The real reason the US went to Iraq had little to do with democracy. Only fools who believe we have democracy here in America, believe we went to Iraq to spread democracy. Democracy, unlike manure and rumors, isn't spread, it's nurtured rather than fertilized.
Former CIA analyst, Ray McGovern said the Iraq war "has nothing to do with democracy or freedom or defending our way of life, it is to do with enriching the pockets of those who support this administration."
We went to Iraq for oil, empire and Israel, in no particular order. Not incidentally, we also went there so a select few, influential friends of those in power, could make a whole lot of money. And of course, we went there to wreck things so American taxpayers and Iraqi citizens could be doubly billed: once for wrecking them and once again for repairing them.
"The War on Terrorism benefits the arms/security/surveillance/oil industries, Bechtel, Halliburton, the Carlyle Group," commented Carol Brouillet.
Benefits and rewards them with no bid contracts. Benefits and rewards them by allowing no oversight on those contracts, by allowing the sole bidders the luxury to fulfill their contract at whatever cost--or not.
For example, an Iraqi woman detailed the depth of these corrupt practices in her thought-provoking link, The Promise and the Threat
"One of my cousins works in a prominent engineering company in Baghdad- we'll call the company H. This company is well-known for designing and building bridges all over Iraq. My cousin, a structural engineer, is a bridge freak. He spends hours talking about pillars and trusses and steel structures to anyone who'll listen. As May was drawing to a close, his manager told him that someone from the CPA wanted the company to estimate the building costs of replacing the New Diyala Bridge on the South East end of Baghdad. He got his team together, they went out and assessed the damage, decided it wasn't too extensive, but it would be costly. They did the necessary tests and analyses (mumblings about soil composition and water depth, expansion joints and girders) and came up with a number they tentatively put forward- $300,000. This included new plans and designs, raw materials (quite cheap in Iraq), labor, contractors, travel expenses, etc. Let's pretend my cousin is a dolt. Let's pretend he hasn't been working with bridges for over 17 years. Let's pretend he didn't work on replacing at least 20 of the 133 bridges damaged during the first Gulf War. Let's pretend he's wrong and the cost of rebuilding this bridge is four times the number they estimated- let's pretend it will actually cost $1,200,000. Let's just use our imagination. A week later, the New Diyala Bridge contract was given to an American company. This particular company estimated the cost of rebuilding the bridge would be around- brace yourselves---$50,000,000 !!"
Fifty million US taxpayer dollars for a million dollar bridge? Sounds about right for the current, corrupt administrations of America and their puppets in Iraq.
We went to Iraq for oil, empire and Israel. But mostly we went so a whole bunch of Bush buddies could make a helluva lot of money, soaking the public. As Condi Rice admitted, we could be in Iraq another ten years. Imagine the profits; Empire doesn't come cheap.
We also went to Iraq at the instigation of religious gangsters. Ours not theirs. We went so foreign and domestic religious leaders, who have far more say in our government than you or I, could hasten along their dream of a poisoned Middle-Eastern kingdom to entice some messiah to come back and reward them for their efforts. Enraptured, these Judeo-Christian jihadists envision a holy war, with plentiful profits along the way.
We went there for Israel. We went there to effectively destroy Israel's sworn enemies, despite the denials of numerous media honchos.
Joel Mobray wrote: "Discussing the Iraq war with the Washington Post former General Anthony Zinni took the path chosen by so many anti-Semites: he blamed it on the Jews ...Technically, the former head of the Central Command in the Middle East didn't say 'Jews.' He instead used a term that has become a new favorite for anti-Semites: 'neoconservatives'."
Does the war with Iraq, or future wars with Syria or Iran or Pakistan, benefit the average US citizen--or Israel? Before the war, General Zinni was one of the very few high level commanders with any experience in the Middle East. Zinni dared speak his mind to Washington and to the American media, not that anybody listened.
We went to Iraq the way Mallory went to Mt. Everest: because it's there. We went for the glory. We went to rewrite American history with neocon names writ large with hubris and with the unfortunate ignorance of history. We went to Iraq with the bodies of American soldiers who naively trusted their leaders. We went for empire cleverly disguised as patriotism.
We went to Iraq to rid the world of Saddam and slowly became Saddam ourselves. We went to free the imprisoned, relieve the tortured, and stuck around to imprison and torture ourselves! We went for a few good reasons, but many more bad ones slowly becoming worse.
And, of course, we went to Iraq to make a whole lot of money in the process for a select few.
Since the Iraq war began the price of gas at the pumps had nearly tripled for consumers. Oil profits in that time measure in the tens of billions. While families sacrifice--wartime usually meant sacrifice--the oil industry reaped windfall bonanzas (Hurricanes don't hurt either). The oil-soaked White House, well connected to the oil industry, may intentionally have bumbled the Iraq war to perpetually benefit big oil with "scarcities." Few know exactly. Those who do are not talking. They're too busy counting all that money.
Pragmatists may claim, with more than a shred of truth, that the US had to invade and occupy the Middle East to erect a fortress around the petroleum resources there. To insure a steady supply of the lubricant that allows the entire creaky machine to function. The theory of Peak Oil is holy writ to them. Thus the patriotism of self-preservation for the American way-of-life outweighs any moral arguments. The need for oil, not just for today or tomorrow but for the next century, necessitates the perpetuation of the American empire, by hook or by crook or by pre-emptive strike.
Like a Trojan horse, democracy was a false gift to the Iraqi people. Inside were the real reasons, fully armed and ready to plunder. Democracy was an afterthought for the thirty-month military occupation of Iraq. Indeed, if democracy truly existed, the Iraqis would have quickly voted us out of Iraq.
And if democracy existed in American, criminal indictments and the impeachment of the president would have occurred long ago. For lying the country into the Middle East, for wasting men, money and materials for the enrichment of a few people connected to the administration. For oil, empire and Israel.
Few know the exact reasons we went to war with Iraq. Those who do are not talking. Yet.
No comments:
Post a Comment