Guardian: Bush*s Other War (Sidney Blumenthal)

[kskiska]

How can Bush feign shock at the carnage in Baghdad when he signed off on reports that predicted it?

By Sidney Blumenthal

In Baghdad, the Bush administration acts as though it is astonished by the postwar carnage. Its feigned shock is a consequence of Washington's intelligence wars. In fact, not only was it warned of the coming struggle and its nature -- ignoring a $5 million State Department report on "The Future of Iraq" -- but Bush himself signed another document in which that predictive information is contained.

According to the congressional resolution authorizing the use of military force in Iraq, the administration is required to submit to Congress reports of postwar planning every 60 days. One such report -- previously undisclosed but revealed here -- bears Bush's signature and is dated April 14. It declares: "We are especially concerned that the remnants of the Saddam Hussein regime will continue to use Iraqi civilian populations as a shield for its regular and irregular combat forces or may attack the Iraqi population in an effort to undermine Coalition goals." Moreover, the report goes on: "Coalition planners have prepared for these contingencies, and have designed the military campaign to minimize civilian casualties and damage to civilian infrastructure."

Yet on Aug. 25, as the violence in postwar Iraq flared, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld claimed that this possibility was not foreseen: "Now was -- did we -- was it possible to anticipate that the battles would take place south of Baghdad and that then there would be a collapse up north, and there would be very little killing and capturing of those folks, because they blended into the countryside and they're still fighting their war?"

"We read their reports," a Senate source told me. "Too bad they don't read their own reports."

more…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1075530,00.html

On Edit: I first posted this article with a link to Salon, but it also appears in The Guardian under a different title. I switched to The Guardian, as it's accessible to everyone.

[rjbcar27]

1. Brilliant article.

A real must read.

[PBinOregon]

2. Absolutely First Rate

Bump this--I hope it gets a good amount of attention.