Bush wanted Bin Laden; Neocons wanted Iraq

Saddam was horrendous, but beaten. He had no WMDs, no Connection to 9/11. Why did the neocons spend years gunning for Iraq and hide their real motives?

When elected, Bush was opposed to "nation building ," but Dick Cheney brought in eight fellow neocons who advocated "regime change" and re-building Iraq. This was before 9/11 and had nothing to do with Bush's war on terrorism.

Cheney's group all belonged to PNAC or IASPS.IASPS advocated regime change to increase Israeli security, while PNAC focused on our Middle East allies but named only Israel. Using 9/11, Cheney and the neocons convinced Bush to go against the long-standing conservative principles he held when elected.

http://zfacts.com/p/775.html

from 9/11 forward. It was all he could talk about on 9/12.

and thought his daddy was nuts for not going on to Baghdad during Gulf War I. He also wanted the legacy of being a 'war pResident' and one-upping Daddy-O by conquering and occupying, and controlling Iraq and all the resources that entailed.

It's clear from Clarke's book that Bush wanted to go to war THEN with Iraq, in spite of being told it was al Qaeda.

Zfacts needs to buy a clue.

Read the downing street memo for christs sake.

They, deliberately and cynically, fooled the American public (part of it) and avoided capturing Bin Laden. The reason for that deceitful tactic?
Had they followed through on capturing him, the game would have been over. There would have been no rationalization of the general white hot desire to destroy S.H., awe the world with US insanity and muscle flexing, and permanently inject the US into control of the middle east's politics and oil wealth. There was also the plan to use the deconstruction/reconstruction of Iraq along with a total privatization of Iraq's commercial interests and the building of a "proof of concept" utopia in the plan of dribble down economics and an absolute market based economy, the wet dream of the neocons and most libertarians.

There was no intention of completely destroying al-Qeida, the Taliban, drug trade, or any other of the heated threats designed to impress the gullible. These folks are not total idiots! (With a useful exception, here and there)
Anybody with the ability to appreciate gaming and gamesmanship will ultimately see through the smoke and will note that the very worst thing a player can do is to eliminate the competition.
Lying political manipulator understand clearly the requirement of telling the public what they want to hear, make hand silhouettes on the wall and keep the game running.

THe crime occurs when the ruling junta pretends that anyone smart enough to figure out the game is also smart enough to realize that all the lies and pretenses are necessary and only the dumbed-down masses think raising your kids to value honesty and integrity is of high survival value.
A chilling example of understanding of the games is the observation from a Russian power broker, Putin, I think, on the dubious future of the US, now that it's global rival was out of the picture.

And besides, why would * want to capture a family friend? That would never do.

No one had a bigger hard on about Iraq than georgie I gotta say some of this stuff about the U.S. being a puppet of Israel- and yes, that is the essence of this piece, is getting downright weird and bordering on that old meme that the Jews control the world.

Anti-war liberals can then be tarred as "anti-semites" (using guilt by association) because they believe the "conspiracy theories".

Although Israel does have a hand in the game, the player conspicuous by its absence here is SA (and the other oil monarchies). For instance, wasn't Bandar Bush one of the first people that * told the Iraq battle plans to..?

Those who refuse to acknowledge gov culbility for the crimes of 9/11: doesn't it seem a tad peculiar, not to mention convenient, that there had been massive defense budget increases and established desires and contigent plans before the fact? ...and the "attack" just happened to work out to their advantage on EVERY level?

is that 9/11 worked out to the advantage of the countries whose citiziens carried out, planned and funded the attack. These countries are now *'s main "allies" in the so-called war on terror.

Help me out here.

which is propaganda in that story. The reality is that Bush is part of a PNAC through his bro "I am going to steal Florida for you" Jeb.

What everyone else is arguing is that the PNAC Gallery didn't divert Bush from pursuing OBL because Bush was with the PNAC program even before he was elected. Overthrowing Saddam was on his agenda from before Day 1.

Heck, the 2000 Republican Platform had a "PNAC plank" advocating aggressive (read: military) action against Saddam, back when the most the PNAC Gallery had to say about OBL was "Osama bin Who?"

Republicans cannot function without one. The "other," the scapegoat, the "enemy," usually one of a different race, gender, religion or ethnicity, they do not function without one.

When Bush first came to power, they tried to revive the Cold War with China. They sent a recon plane over Chinese territory, and it was eventually forced to land, launching week-long crisis that went down the memory hole.

When 9/11 hit, the PNAC/Neocons were ready with a new enemy, a new "other," perfect in that it is of a different race and religion/ethnicity, and even better (they must have been salivating) in that it would feed their bloodlust, meet their foreign policy "goals" of Middle East domination and imperialism, and could be made into an endless war of secrecy, torture, hatred and mass murder.

It was a match made in Hell.

He can't think of any strategy, but he is very much part of the extended PNAC family. It is not that Cheney thought of it and convinced Bush. He wanted to be a war president.

wasn't a neocon. Richard Clarke and Tony Blair also pushed for going into Afghanistan rather than Iraq (because they mistakenly thought that the war on terror was about stopping terrorism).

I think at that point * resigned himseldf to Afghanistan as a necessary stepping stone on the way to Iraq.

Our press successfully sold the idea to the populace that invading Afghanistan, and thereby inflicting misery and casualties on the people there who were already the Taliban's victims, was indeed a good thing.

bin laden WORKS for bush.
thats why he hasnt been caught.

so he can create terror whenever they need it.

prior to W's Selection? Bush had his sights on Saddam - before he stepped foot into the OO.

“He was thinking about invading Iraq in 1999,” said author and journalist Mickey Herskowitz. “It was on his mind. He said to me: ‘One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief.’ And he said, ‘My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.’ He said, ‘If I have a chance to invade….if I had that much capital, I’m not going to waste it. I’m going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I’m going to have a successful presidency.”

http://www.gnn.tv/articles/article.php?id=761

Did you catch that? "If I have a chance to invade..."