Why Do Neocons Start Wars, Yet Refuse to Fight Them?

[smelter]

I know that is standard left wing dogma, but the US doesn't get much, if any, oil from Iraq.

Standard left wing dogma, not hardly! The intention was there from the beginning except the war has gone so badly, oil revenues from Iraq never came to fruition.

Read executive order 13303 signed by George Bush back in May 22, 2003, the war in Iraq began on May 19, 2003:

I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, find that the threat of attachment or other judicial process against the Development Fund for Iraq, Iraqi petroleum and petroleum products, and interests therein, and proceeds, obligations, or any financial instruments of any nature whatsoever arising from or related to the sale or marketing thereof, and interests therein, obstructs the orderly reconstruction of Iraq, the restoration and maintenance of peace and security in the country, and the development of political, administrative, and economic institutions in Iraq. This situation constitutes an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States and I hereby declare a national emergency to deal with that threat.

I hereby order:

Section 1. Unless licensed or otherwise authorized pursuant to this order, any attachment, judgment, decree, lien, execution, garnishment, or other judicial process is prohibited, and shall be deemed null and void, with respect to the following:

(a) the Development Fund for Iraq, and (b) all Iraqi petroleum and petroleum products, and interests therein, and proceeds, obligations, or any financial instruments of any nature whatsoever arising from or related to the sale or marketing thereof, and interests therein, in which any foreign country or a national thereof has any interest, that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of United States persons.

http://reclaimdemocracy.org/articles_2003/executive_order_13303.html

 

[koontzfanwv]

We invaded Iraq because Bush had the same info that Clinton had in 98 when Clinton said "sooner or later something was going to have to be done about Iraq. The WMDS the Pentagon knew they had. British intelligence also had the same info. For you t say that it was debunked is ridiculous. They used WMDs on their own people for God's sake. Quit following other's talking points please. The mistake the administration made was going to the UN with a televised explanation of war pointing out exactly where the WMDs were located. Iraq does have television. Did they expect Iraq to not destroy them?The administration had to explain the reason to the American people but to televise the locations of the WMDs.... What planet are you on,Random?

 

[koontzfanwv]

And by the way Random.we are still in Afghanistan. We have never left. The deaths of American soldiers is tragic but at least they are dying fighting al-queda. Where they fight al-queda is irrelevant considering it is a worldwide terrorist organization. Our soldiers know what they are fighting for and i find it a damn shame that theleft doesn't. The left demoralizes them by not getting behind their efforts and endangers them even further. Yes al-queda came over the Iraqi border into Iraq from border countries. And yes a spider builds a web to trap the flies before they eat them. Which i hope our soldiers do to them.

 

[andysayshi]

Wow, koontzfanwv! You STILL believe there really were WMDs??? You're the only one, I'm afraid.

Colin Powell doesn't.

Charles Duelfer, head of the Iraq Survey Group doesn't.

Even George Bush doesn't!

You accuse others of following "talking points", but you've swallowed the "Al-Qaeda" rhetoric of the Bush Administration hook, line and sinker. This is NOT World War II. Saddam was a cruel, evil dictator, but was not relentlessly taking over nation after nation like the Germany or Japan of that war. Most of the violence occurring in Iraq has absolutely NOTHING to do with Al-Qaeda, but in order to justify their war, the Administration have tried to build it into a tangible enemy.

We KNOW Saddam had no ties to Al-Qaeda. But that's why this war is so wrong, because there is no such enemy. In Iraq, the troops are standing in the fireline between a group of religous factions who may NEVER be at peace, many of whom resent the troops being there at all.

 

[HenryReardon]

You said that nobody had ever seen him, which has been proven wrong. Get over it, and get on with your life. That is, if you have a life outside of your blind, irrational, and all-consuming, hatred of Bush.

The man is an idiot, for the most part, and he has betrayed this country by failing to control our borders. He does not, however, deserve the expenditure of energy you display.

 

[Nishin]

^ Not what he said, you are being dishonest and it's getting old after 3 posts... either learn to read or learn to understand what you read, thanks.

 

[andysayshi]

You said that nobody had ever seen him, which has been proven wrong. Get over it, and get on with your life. That is, if you have a life outside of your blind, irrational, and all-consuming, hatred of Bush.

The man is an idiot, for the most part, and he has betrayed this country by failing to control our borders. He does not, however, deserve the expenditure of energy you display.

If the man running your country is "an idiot, for the most part, and he has betrayed this country", then I would think NO expenditure of energy could be too great to remove him office.

 

[RandomAccess]

We invaded Iraq because Bush had the same info that Clinton had in 98 when Clinton said "sooner or later something was going to have to be done about Iraq. The WMDS the Pentagon knew they had. British intelligence also had the same info. For you t say that it was debunked is ridiculous. They used WMDs on their own people for God's sake. Quit following other's talking points please. The mistake the administration made was going to the UN with a televised explanation of war pointing out exactly where the WMDs were located. Iraq does have television. Did they expect Iraq to not destroy them?The administration had to explain the reason to the American people but to televise the locations of the WMDs.... What planet are you on,Random?

THEY HAD NO WMDs!!! What does it take to force that "insight" into some neocon heads!?!? I'm here on Earth, thank you very much. . . come join us when you find some time to welcome rational, civil discourse.

Our friend Lancelva had this to offer on the topic in another thread:

The incoming Bush Administration got something for free from the outgoing Clinton Administration---a new interagency counter-terrorism operation called the Counter-terrorism Security Group (CSG), led by a terrorism specialist named Richard Clarke, and a plan entitled “Strategy for Eliminating the Threat from the Jihadist Networks of al Qaeda: Status and Prospects." The CSG was disbanded, Clarke was demoted, and the plan was ignored by the Bush Administration. THAT, my friend, is not only criminal, but abhorrent.

He's absolutely right. Had G-dub not arrogantly ignored Clinton & the steps he had taken, we wouldn't be in Iraq today.

 

[RandomAccess]

And by the way Random.we are still in Afghanistan. We have never left. The deaths of American soldiers is tragic but at least they are dying fighting al-queda. Where they fight al-queda is irrelevant considering it is a worldwide terrorist organization. Our soldiers know what they are fighting for and i find it a damn shame that theleft doesn't. The left demoralizes them by not getting behind their efforts and endangers them even further. Yes al-queda came over the Iraqi border into Iraq from border countries. And yes a spider builds a web to trap the flies before they eat them. Which i hope our soldiers do to them.

What the heck are you addressing here? Did I ever say that we were no longer in Afghanistan? No. I said that we trained them. And, I said that they weren't in Iraq, but in Afghanistan, prior to our invasion of Iraq. They only came to Iraq because we were there.

 

[HenryReardon]

If the man running your country is "an idiot, for the most part, and he has betrayed this country", then I would think NO expenditure of energy could be too great to remove him office.

You and I both know that it isn't going to happen, and stirring up the same stale and very old crap doesn't help.

He will be gone, anyway, in eighteen months.

Isn't it time to focus on more important things?

 

[Andreus]

why do neocons start wars?

irrational fear, cowardice, immorality, and a complete disrespect for what it means to be american.

 

[andysayshi]

You and I both know that it isn't going to happen, and stirring up the same stale and very old crap doesn't help.

He will be gone, anyway, in eighteen months.

Isn't it time to focus on more important things?

More important things? Like three and a half thousand dead American servicemen? Like 50,000-500,000 dead Iraqis? Like 2 million Iraqi refugees who have fled their homes?

Sorry, eighteen months is too long to wait. And recognizing the problem without raising your voice is actually BEING part of the problem.

 

[HenryReardon]

More important things? Like three and a half thousand dead American servicemen? Like 50,000-500,000 dead Iraqis? Like 2 million Iraqi refugees who have fled their homes?

Sorry, eighteen months is too long to wait. And recognizing the problem without raising your voice is actually BEING part of the problem.

Raising your voice to what?

Don't you think that Pelosi et al would impeach Bush if they thought they had grounds? They would, and they don't, and they know it.

You people are like holy rollers going to tent meeting after tent meeting, getting fired up over the same old shit each time, and accomplishing nothing except a great expenditure of energy.

 

[JayHawk]

Well judging by the warlike nature of this nation, I guess neocons have been in charge since her inception......Name ten years time where we weren't blowin something or somebody up?

SO that begs if the NeoCons were always incharge what is so neo(new) about that?

 

[Andreus]

Well judging by the warlike nature of this nation, I guess neocons have been in charge since her inception......Name ten years time where we weren't blowin something or somebody up?

SO that begs if the NeoCons were always incharge what is so neo(new) about that?

well that begs a more subtle question mazda....

can you tell me when america committed acts of attrocity, torture, and preemptive warfare in all that time?

i seem to remember america and its long history of isolationism, even so much so that it took pearl harbor for the greatest generation to get involved... and they did not occupy, they removed occupiers

there is a difference

the ability to grasp these differences is what has put the conservative movement out of touch and out of power

 

[JayHawk]

Have you ever read about Manifest Destiny?

We have been the conqueror for much longer than romantics like to think. It is even arguable that we ALLOWED our country to be attacked to pull us into the war of that greatest generation. Barely arguable and kin to many conspiracies yet it is possible to argue. An intelligent warrior might allow his enemy to wear itself out before entering a conflict, thereby more reliably ensuring his dominance on the battlefield.

Wanna know what the difference is between these new wars where everyone is horrified and the old type where only some people come back? The people telling the story now have no inherent interest in making a glorified history where all was just and fair. No, far from that. Most of those who flock to war to tell the story these days has zero stake in the conflicts outcome so they identify with whom they can and that is usually the victims.

 

[Andreus]

nice theories

do you have any documentation to show that america has engages in preemptive warfare before?

why would wolfowitz have been writing papers about it for the last ten years if it had been an established past of american foreign policy

manifest destiny does not cover attacking any nation that you percieve is a threat so that they wont be able to attack you one day

that is something entirely different

WE have actually traditionally fought nations that BELIEVED in preemptive warfare

nations like germany, japan, italy, just to name a few

i dont think you are really considering what you are saying and if you are you are being incredibly reaching and dishonest

that is not what friends do

 

[JayHawk]

Please one fucking war and you wish to dismiss our heritage of war.

1846-48 -- Mexican-American War After the annexation of Texas in 1845, the United States and Mexico failed to resolve a boundary dispute and President Polk said that it was necessary to deploy forces in Mexico to meet a threatened invasion. On May 13,1846, declared war with Mexico

1857 -- Nicaragua. - April to May, November to December. In May Commander Charles H. Davis of the United States Navy, with some marines, received the surrender of William Walker, self proclaimed president of Nicaragua, who was losing control of the country to forces financed by his former business partner, Cornelius Vanderbilt, and protected his men from the retaliation of native allies who had been fighting Walker. In November and December of the same year United States vessels USS Saratoga, USS Wabash, and Fulton opposed another attempt of William Walker on Nicaragua. Commodore Hiram Paulding's act of landing marines and compelling the removal of Walker to the United States, was tacitly disavowed by Secretary of State Lewis Cass, and Paulding was forced into retirement.[RL30172]

1899-1913 -- Philippine Islands. Philippine-American War US forces protected American interests following the war with Spain, defeating rebellious Filipinos seeking immediate national independence.[RL30172] The U.S. government declared the “insurgency” officially over in 1902, when the Filipino leadership generally accepted American rule. Skirmishes between government troops and armed groups lasted until 1913, and some historians consider these unofficial extensions of the war.[2]

1914-17 -- Mexico. Tampico Affair led to Occupation of Veracruz, Mexico. Undeclared Mexican--American hostilities followed the Dolphin affair and Villa's raids . Also Pancho Villa Expedition) -- an abortive military operation conducted by the United States Army against the military forces of Francisco "Pancho" Villa from 1916 to 1917. and included capture of Vera Cruz. On March 19, on orders from President Woodrow Wilson, General John J. Pershing led an invasion force of 10,000 men into Mexico to capture Villa.



I wont even get into the manifest destiny attacks we pursued. Ask an indian how kind and upstanding America has always been.

 

[JayHawk]

You can read into many of the actions that were regarded as "protecting American Interest" and come to the conclusion that we used our military might to get our way. We will continue to do so. What is the first thing that occurs when a country starts talkin in language the US does not like. Thats right a Carrier battle group floats up alongside to ask nicely for them to play nice. By nice we mean by our rules.

 

[JayHawk]

Go on Alfie ask an Indian how trumped up his conspriacy theories are from their point of view. ANd no casinos dont make up for it