This was discussed quite often here at DU in 2002. All the aspects of it, quite often. Bookman is not a liberal editor, but he does have a soul. The Atlanta Journal Constitution is not known for liberalism. This is why some of us rather react a little about the war. Most here were against it before the war, and I hate it when people are told to wait, it will get better. This is one of the first really public articles on this. We all know this now, but it was known widely in 2002 and before.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2319.htmSNIP..."The official story on Iraq has never made sense. The connection that the Bush administration has tried to draw between Iraq and al-Qaida has always seemed contrived and artificial. In fact, it was hard to believe that smart people in the Bush administration would start a major war based on such flimsy evidence. The pieces just didn't fit. Something else had to be going on; something was missing.
In recent days, those missing pieces have finally begun to fall into place. As it turns out, this is not really about Iraq. It is not about weapons of mass destruction, or terrorism, or Saddam, or U.N. resolutions.
This war, should it come, is intended to mark the official emergence of the United States as a full-fledged global empire, seizing sole responsibility and authority as planetary policeman. It would be the culmination of a plan 10 years or more in the making, carried out by those who believe the United States must seize the opportunity for global domination, even if it means becoming the "American imperialists" that our enemies always claimed we were.Once that is understood, other mysteries solve themselves. For example,
why does the administration seem unconcerned about an exit strategy from Iraq once Saddam is toppled? Because we won't be leaving. Having conquered Iraq, the United States will create permanent military bases in that country from which to dominate the Middle East, including neighboring Iran." END SNIP