Paul Wolfowitz gives the reasons for the war

[Theophylact]

In an interview with Vanity Fair in May 2003, he said,

Quote:

[T]here have always been three fundamental concerns. One is weapons of mass destruction, the second is support for terrorism, the third is the criminal treatment of the Iraqi people. Actually I guess you could say there's a fourth overriding one which is the connection between the first two. ... The third one by itself, as I think I said earlier, is a reason to help the Iraqis but it's not a reason to put American kids' lives at risk, certainly not on the scale we did it.

So now we have the Senate Intelligence Committee' report: (1) turned out to be wrong, (2) turned out to be wrong, and even Wolfowitz said (3) was insufficient.

[RayH]

As far as Wolfowitz is concerned, they were there and he didn't like them!

[J-Excel]

1 turned out to be wrong but intel at the time said otherwise. 2 was right. At a minimum Saddam paid the families of Palestinian suicide bombers.

[John Prophet]

Wolfowitz gave the reasons for the war back in like '92.....it was planned from long long ago ..basically planned in the waning days of Bush seniors Presidency

"Wolfys" site http://www.newamericancentury.org/

short article, of which many can be found http://www.counterpunch.org/leopold01142004.html

----

Los Angeles: The US decision to stress the threat posed by Iraq's supposed weapons of mass destruction above all others was taken for "bureaucratic" reasons to justify the war, Deputy Defence Secretary Paul Wolfowitz was quoted as saying in remarks released today.

Wolfowitz, seen as one of the most hawkish figures in the Bush administration's policy on Iraq, said President Saddam Hussein's alleged cache of chemical, biological and possibly nuclear weapons was merely one of several reasons behind the decision to go to war.

"For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction, because it was the one reason everyone could agree on," Wolfowitz was quoted as saying in Vanity Fair magazine's July issue.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/...?oneclick=true

-----

Basically Wolfowitz et al had planned to stake a strong US military presence in the middle east and iraq was the most logical target...as all of us grown ups should KNOW by now, whatever reason is given and touted in the press (and in congress etc etc) is nothing more than a smokescreen and the real reasons always lie deeper....we have to have our nice little sugar coated lies basically because the average American cant handle the truth, nor do they want to know the truth.


The invasions of Iraq (and afghanistan) was planned long before GW took office, long before the govt production called "911" took place.

JP

[RayH]

Building a 3,000 staff US Embassy in Baghdad. Hmmmmm

[MTAtech]

I just know that if I was a CEO and I bet the company on a particular decision and that decision was based upon wrong information, my board of directors wouldn't let me get away with, "it wasn't my fault because Research got it all wrong." I'd be fired on the spot.

How about you? Would your boss be as forgiving?

[John Prophet]

in this instance it would be very hard to define who the "boss" is...David Rockefeller and his cohorts perhaps?

"David Rockefeller is Founder and Honorary Chairman of the Trilateral Commission. Mr. Rockefeller serves as Honorary Chairman of the Americas Society, the Council on Foreign Relations and Rockefeller University" (in other words he shapes the world, lol..no matter which "president" comes or goes)


so he is one of the globalist elite that sets up and trains mid level managers like GWB and Slick Willie....when it boils down to it, our glorious and highly exalted Presidents (and congress etc...check yourself and see how many are members of the CFR etc) are nothing more than fetching boys doing other mens bidding. Which explains things like NAFTA which have totally devastated the economies of many parts of America will China has entered her glory years.

Very hard to swallow that truth but it is true none-the-less.

JP