New British memo: U.S. gave 'little thought' to Iraq war aftermath

[quaoar]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/11/AR2005061100723.html

By Walter Pincus
The Washington Post

WASHINGTON — A briefing paper prepared for British Prime Minister Tony Blair and his top advisers eight months before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq concluded that the U.S. military was not preparing adequately for what the British memo predicted would be a “protracted and costly” postwar occupation of that country.

The eight-page memo, written in advance of a July 23, 2002, Downing Street meeting on Iraq, provides new insights into how senior British officials saw a Bush administration decision to go to war as inevitable, and realized more clearly than their American counterparts the potential for the post-invasion instability that continues to plague Iraq.

In its introduction, the memo “Iraq: Conditions for Military Action” notes that U.S. “military planning for action against Iraq is proceeding apace,” but adds that “little thought” has been given to, among other things, “the aftermath and how to shape it.”

< snip >

Saying that “we need to be sure that the outcome of the military action would match our objective,” the memo’s authors point out, “A post-war occupation of Iraq could lead to a protracted and costly nation-building exercise.” The authors add, “As already made clear, the U.S. military plans are virtually silent on this point. Washington could look to us to share a disproportionate share of the burden.”

[SnoopDog]

1. ..

[WhoWantsToBeOccupied]

2. "Little thought" ...Isn't that an exaggeration?!?!

[DuckBurp]

3. The English have a way of understating things ...

in order to make their point.

[baron j]

4. Thankfully the Brits aren't as shred-happy with documents as we are!

Unless we just got lucky...

[Imagevision]

44. Quite obviosly the Brit's media isn't as censured as in the US.

[NVMojo]

54. funny thing is that they have very strict libel laws ...you can sue easily

[stubtoe]

55. And I suspect they're out to prove it.

The Times Online looks to be revving up its coverage on this topic:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1650822,00.html?click

"Ministers were told of need for Gulf war ‘excuse’"

I think maybe they're out to rub a few AP noses ...

[radfringe]

30. remember what bush* said prior to the invasion....

"...there are NO plans on my desk...."

at the time I snorted at that statement... yeah, right - no plans, bush*t!

well, taking into consideration as to how well the invasion and aftermath has gone - I'm inclined to believe that there were NO PLANS other than a marketing plan to sell this stupid war to the American people.
:evilgrin:

The support for the bush-war is dropping. Enlistments fell short last month by 25%. On NPR this week - there was a quick "sound-bite" from one recruiter - (paraphrased) "..if we don't have volunteers it's going to come to a point where young men won't have a choice of joining..." the recruiter never said the "D"-word (draft), but it was implied.

and if the draft is re-instated (officially and through the front door) - I don't think the public's reaction will be favorable.

[Dangerously Amused]

51. Why didn't you believe him? Bush doesn't lie...

If Bush says there "are NO plans for war on his desk..." there probably aren't.

They are on his CREDENZDA. But not on his desk! Or they are on Cheney's desk. But not on HIS desk.

And so it is with nearly every assertion of fact emanating from the Bush administration: Very few "lies," and even less honesty.

[AceAlmighty82]

5. If this isn't...

the smoking bullet of the smoking gun in the hands of Bush/Blair...I really don't know how he sleeps at night..I really don't..if I had all this to hide and on top of all the other lies and misconceptions..I'd have a heart attack just thinking about the truth slipping out. I'm not a follower of the bible or anything but I know that if God/Jesus is pissed off at someone it's Bush. And what makes things worse is that nobody cares..yes we have almost 500,000 signatures..but there are 300 million(my number might be off) people in this country...that isn't enough...the people I work with don't even know what it is. But you know what...what goes around, comes around.
:banghead: :grr:

[Gronk Groks]

7. The British knew that it wasn't a liberation, it was an occupation.

Remember that Iraq was part of the British Empire when they still had an Empire. They were afraid that they were going to get stuck cleaning up the sh*t after the Americans broke it (Iraq).

Feel better about this AceAlmighty: Look at the posters tonight. Very few 1000+ posts, alot of new converts... O8)

[AceAlmighty82]

15. Oh yeah...

That does help now that you mention it...i've looked at this site for quite a while but never joined I noticed a bunch of 1000+ posters whenever I would read through them. I've always been a democrat..so I realized when the 2000 election came and went, that is. Anyways, off the subject has anyone come up with a replacement for the US ambassador for the UN. Bolton isn't cutting it..as everyone knows...any of the Democrats offer another choice..that might help that situation..key word MIGHT.....thanks Gronk Groks :D

[Gronk Groks]

19. UN Ambassador Bolt On

Shrub is not smart enough to give up on Bolt On. He will shove him down our throats whether we gag on him or not. (eewgh: bad mental image!). Besides it is not the Democratic job to give Bush an intelligent alternative. Not that Shrub would know what to do with a competent UN Ambassador (Hell, he doesn't want a competent UN!):wtf:

[AceAlmighty82]

46. I guess

we gotta sit through all this crap then and hope for the best until 2006...if dems take back the majority..if not that then 2008 where we gotta fix everything he broke or maimed...sucks that's what it has come to with running the country...i guess compromise doesn't exist in the the repubs and fristians minds...but i knew that from the beginning..but i'm feeling better with all the converts

[CrispyQ]

40. In response to your comment

"the people I work with don't even know what it is."

What pisses me off is I have several Dem friends who were actively involved in the election process last year -- campaigning, volunteering for various candidates, sending/forwarding emails, sporting bumper stickers, etc, & now, NOTHING. I've even had a two of them ask me to not send them political stuff anymore. They are "disillusioned & not interested in politics anymore."

GASP! If these people have become apathetic, how hard is it going to be to wake up the sheeple? I would like to shake them back to reality: we can NEVER let up on the BFEE. NEVER!

Arghhh!!!

[FreedomAngel82]

77. If I had that problem

I'd be Nixon paranoid and bug everybody's room but mine and the office. Heh heh.

[ovidsen]

6. Ladies and gentlemen, start your engines...

If this doesn't get people fired up, especially our noble members of Congress, then we truly deserve the government we have.

[ClintonTyree]

28. With the exception of a few...

republican Congressmen, they'll all follow bush in lockstep and never question anything he does. I've said it before, bush could murder a Nun in broad daylight on National TV and the Slugs wouldn't allow an investigation.
The Dems will be fired up, except for our DINOs like Lieberman, Biden etc. who will ALWAYS give bush the benefit of any doubt, but what good will that do? The Slugs won't even let the Dems have hearings anymore without abruptly ending them and walking out. It's an exercise in futility for the Democrats in Congress.
There is NO OVERSIGHT of this administration, NONE! They won't answer questions, provide documents.......they're free to do anything they want without fear of retribution.
Of course, our MSM will take hold of this like the Pit Bulls they are ( :puke: ) and all will be forgotten as soon as the next runaway bride or celebrity molester comes along.
I see nothing or no one that can bring this criminal administration to justice. The American people themselves are starting to wake up, but it's already too late. They should have been paying attention last November.

[Ioo]

8. READ

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1650822,00.html

[Dudley_DUright]

37. Wow

:wow:

Why can't I read stuff like this in the US press? BTW, welcome to DU Ioo. :hi:

[chomskysright]

57. great LINK: at the threshold of 1 million signatures: LET'S MAKE IT 2 MILL

Frustrated at the refusal by the White House to respond to their letter, the congressmen have set up a website — www.downingstreetmemo.com — to collect signatures on a petition demanding the same answers. Conyers promised to deliver it to Bush once it reached 250,000 signatures. By Friday morning it already had more than 500,000 with as many as 1m expected to have been obtained when he delivers it to the White House on Thursday.


AfterDowningStreet.org, another website set up as a result of the memo, is calling for a congressional committee to consider whether Bush’s actions as depicted in the memo constitute grounds for impeachment. It has been flooded with visits from people angry at what they see as media self-censorship in ignoring the memo. It claims to have attracted more than 1m hits a day. Democrats.com, another website, even offered $1,000 (about £550) to any journalist who quizzed Bush about the memo’s contents, although the Reuters reporter who asked the question last Tuesday was not aware of the reward and has no intention of claiming it. The complaints of media self-censorship have been backed up by the ombudsmen of The Washington Post, The New York Times and National Public Radio, who have questioned the lack of attention the minutes have received from their organisations.
[]

[Bluebear]

9. DOH! Screwed up another one, Dim Son! What a boob you are.

Ran every company he had into the ground. Riding Poppy's coattails his whole life. Everything prior to age 40 considered his "youth"...

and now "the U.S. military was not preparing adequately for what the British memo predicted would be a “protracted and costly” postwar occupation of that country."

What a fuck up.

[crabstoned]

12. I'll echo that

:banghead: I'm a Dem in the oil & gas business, in Texas, and it just drives me nuts that this State thinks he's an oil man, much less a Texan - which I'm not, and I didn't move here as fast as I could, either, contrary to a popular bumper sticker.

Since Dim Son is fond of sayings we have in Texas, someone needs to tell him this: Quit pissin' on my leg and tellin' me it's rainin'.

[nittygritty]

14. Welcome to DU, Crabstoned!

it is an oasis...

:)

[quaoar]

16. Bush was to the oil business

what Rush Limbaugh was to sports broadcasting.

[crabstoned]

56. Bwaaaa! Good one.

:rofl:

[enid602]

10. Blair

The really amazing thing is that the British would be so short-sided as to go along with *'s little plan, after reading the contents of these (so far) two minutes documents. Clearly, * wanted to invade despite the known obstacles, no doubt for US hegemony, petroleum and the attendant ability to inflate defense budgets and contracts to a level which would make the pugs salivate. But what was in it for the British? I'd like to know what * has on Blair to make him enter such a risky game.

[magellan]

27. There's a BBC Panorama vid online that somewhat explains this, enid602

It's the documentary from March this year. I don't have the link handy (perhaps someone else would be kind enough to provide it), but it features Robin Cook, Labour's former Foreign Secretary, who resigned over the Iraq War. He insists Blair agreed to support the US simply because it was that important to Blair to prove he was a reliable US ally, not just a good friend of Clinton.

As Cook wrote in his diary at the time: '(Blair) was patient with us, but he was firm where he saw Britain's national interests lie: "I tell you that we must steer close to America. If we don't we will lose our influence to shape what they do".' (See Transcript: The Road to War for Robin Cook's full diary on Iraq. It's a brilliant read.)

Clearly Blair made the same mistake a lot of Republicans here made: thinking these Theo-corporate demagogues cared about anyone outside their own agenda. He also erred in thinking that cozying up to Bush** would strengthen him politically at home.

Double-oops.

I think there's slightly more to it, though. I suspect Blair also understood the ramifications of sitting it out, which were made clear by Bush** numerous times: Anyone who doesn't support the war doesn't get a slice of the money pie when it comes to reconstruction.

British Petroleum probably figured highly in there somewhere. I've also heard that HSBC, a British-owned bank, was looking forward to setting up shop in Iraq, along with other major int'l corporations (many US-owned). They all got to watch their dreams of avarice turn to dust, literally, as the situation in post-invasion Iraq deteriorated through US mismanagement.

(edited to fix an html oops!)

[Frederik]

31. HSBC

was given the first license for a foreign bank to operate in Iraq in 40 years. But, guess what, it has yet to open any branches in Iraq. Iraq turned out to be nothing like the business eldorado people had fantasized about - the insurgency put an end to that dream. Much of the businesspeople evacuated spring 04, when all hell brake loose.

[The Crazy Canadian]

42. BBC Panorama

It might be this one.

http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/video_iraqwar.htm

BBC Panorama – Iraq, Tony & the truth

Reveals how several of the claims made in public by Blair during the build up to the war - and afterwards - conflict with what we now know was going on behind the scenes, as evidenced for instance by government officials and documents

[magellan]

69. That's the one, thanks, Crazy Canadian!

:hi:

[bread_and_roses]

65. Blair is Saruman...

...to the evil Cabal's Sauron:

"...It would be wise, Gandalf...there will be rich reward...and the Wise...may...come at last to direct its' courses, to control it...deploring evils done by the way..."

I would rather have seen "excuse for war" as a headline, but I guess that I should be grateful that this is getting play at all.

[wiggs]

11. The magnitude of this screw-up is too much for public to grasp.

The extent of suffering, draining of national treasury, and ill will created by the unecessary invasion and incompetent planning of aftermath is almost indescribable. And certainly much of the public does not go out of their way to understand it.

[wiggs]

13. Chaos, suffering, and disruption may not have been seen as undesirable

Almost every step of the way, our adminsitration has made decisions that seem to make the situation worse. An apparent lack of thought to the aftermath...shortage of troops...looting allowed...soldiers dismissed with their weapons from service....use of Kurds in Fallujia...decimation of Fallujia...display of dead Hussien sons...infrastructure not protected....no rebuilding....no Iraqi contractors used.....Abu Ghraib....borders not closed...manipulating election so that one leader could not emerge...installation of CIA operative Allawi as leader...use of outsider Chalabi to control oil...damage of sacred Mosques....lack of training for new troops...unwillingness early on to have UN participate....on and on.

Is this incompetence or planning? Could this really be the result of merely horrendous decision making?? It would be difficult to screw up as badly as they have on accident. So I'm thinking that they didn't mind if Iraq became unstable, chaotic, and miserable....all the more reason for us to stay...all the more distraction away from stealing of oil.

Now I'm not saying they could have predicted the extent of the insurrection, but I have to think that it was discussed how to leave Iraq in poor shape and still under our control.

Sounds a lot like 9/11 where the administration had to have some idea that something was going to happen and the neocons managed to convince others that it wouldn't be so bad if something did.

[rzemanfl]

33. I agree with your last sentence 100%. n/t

[chomskysright]

58. famous psychology exper relating back to JFK & Bay of Pigs: GP THINK..

associated with close-mindedness / no new information as associated with a group who will not permit other viewpoints.

will look for it in a moment.

[grasswire]

63. more chaos = more profit

That's the way they see it.

The only necessary objective in Iraq was to break the egg.

Once the egg was broken, untold billions of dollars would end up in the pockets of Bush cronies. More chaos = more profit.

There was no downside for breaking the egg, for them. The U.S. treasury would be drained so social programs could be ended, to name one "benefit."

[DeepGreen]

17. Yahoo Vote ! The story needs more attention !

Let's try to out vote repugs on this !

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050612/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_postwar;_ylt=AmDfHnf2CWFmpseFDr7bV6pvaA8F;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

[AAARRRGGGHHH]

21. I voted

I just continue to be shocked that we continually have to try to out-vote them. It scares the bejeezus out of me that they perpetually defend this administration and its' actions.

I just don't get it.

[ClintonTyree]

29. The freeps...

stay up all night long just to vote down these stories. What they don't realize is that every vote of theirs keeps the story on the front page so normal people can see it later.
It's always amazed me as well, the lengths these people will go to in order to prop up their illegitimate president. We're talking people with very, VERY small minds here.

[CrispyQ]

41. Love your screen name!!!

Welcome to DU!

:hi:

[Straight Shooter]

18. Can anyone say "done deal" or "fait accompli"?

"Fuck Saddam, we're taking him out." (george w. bush, March 2002)

Who were the 3 Senators in that meeting when bush uttered those charming words? They knew, too.

[Douglas Carpenter]

20. Let's also keep at the media--we're getting somewhere

:bounce:


Just a reminder of some very, very important links:

To sign Congressman Conyers’ letter

http://www.johnconyers.campaignoffice.com


To put and keep pressure on the Mainstream Media:

http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/takeaction.html#awaken


http://www.afterdowningstreet.org


LISTEN TO THE RANDI RHODES SHOW-to keep up daily with what’s going on with--THE DOWNING STREET MEMO:

http://www.therandirhodesshow.com


Peace
O8)

Here is my standard letter to the Media:


Dear Sir/Madam:

As you know, on May 1 of this year a document now commonly referred to as “|The Downing Street Memo” was released into the British Press. This document raises serious question about how the administration was handling intelligence related to Iraq and appears to suggest that the Bush Administration had already decided on war when publicly it was claiming that no such decision had been made.

This document and perhaps other documents suggest that the Bush administration was determined to “fix intelligence” around a predetermined policy.

It is most disturbing that there has been a virtual media blackout regarding “The Downing Street Memo”. Even more disturbing is the absence in the America media of any credible discussion or coverage regarding strong, credible and independent evidence that the Bush Administration intentionally mislead the U.S. Congress, the media and the American people.

I do hope you will accept the responsibility to address this issue and provide serious investigative journalism into this matter.

Furthermore, on Thursday June 16, 2005, Rep. John Conyers, Jr., ranking minority member of the House Judiciary Committee, and other House members will hold a hearing to consider testimony concerning the Downing Street minutes and questions of possible fixing of prewar intelligence. I do hope you will be giving full coverage to these events.

Sincerely,

[Donna Zen]

22. "Blind Into Baghdad"

by James Fallows was a carefully documented piece that detailed the lack of post-war planning. Can't these people read?

It was in the "Atlantic Monthly" not exactly Deep Throat material. All one had to do was open the magazine.

I'm not saying that because this has been out there forever that the memo is unimportant, I'm just stunned that they have the nerve to act like they have suddenly come upon the scoop of a lifetime.

OMG!

[JRob]

23. !?

[sandnsea]

24. Dammit, this IS NOT the story

Bush faked the need to go to war in order to implement his cockamamie Bush Doctrine. THAT is the story, don't get diverted!

[LunaC]

26. It all starts and ends with the PNAC

If that's what you mean by the Bush Doctrine.

[sandnsea]

49. I mean the National Security Stratetgy

We don't have to convince people of the PNAC, it's laid out in the National Security Strategy too. THEY like to call it the Bush Doctrine, THEY call it a strategy to "increase the American perimeter", etc. Just use their own words against them.

http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.15845/pub_detail.asp

http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.html

http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss5.html

[chomskysright]

59. GOAL: American Primacy: Bush doctrine...Logical? don't think so...

http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.15845/pub_detail....

The Logic of American Primacy

Today, at least four realities argue convincingly for the continued and vigorous exercise of American national power, to include "preemptive" military actions. First of all, the fact of unprecedented American power is hardly in dispute

YES, BUT YOU HAVE TO HAVE AN AMERICAN REPUBLIC WHOSE CITIZENS WILL PUT UP WITH THE SHIT THAT IS CREATED USING THEIR OWN TAX DOLLARS AND THAT'S A BIG BIG PROBLEM RE: THIS.

The agenda is to bully the people to 'sit down and shut up' just like with Fascist asshole Cheney today on USA Today doing his lying best to say something about how Howard Dean 'never won anything...maybe his momma loved him but....'

USA today, in the next paragraph, went on to say that Howard Dean was elected governor of VT 5 times.

[sandnsea]

60. ???

I have absolutely no clue what your point is.

[LunaC]

61. Gotcha'!

If you compare the "National Security Strategy of the United States of America" position paper with the PNAC's "Rebuilding America's Defenses" manifesto you'll notice that in many places it uses the exact same language.

[slamthecrank]

73. American perimeter?

where is it called this? Just asking because i haven't heard it called that, yet...and would love to nail somebody on it.

And you're right - people are getting diverted. We need to get louder.

[Tiggeroshii]

25. That isn't the reason this would be a ''smoking gun"' memo...

The reason is that it proves that "intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."

Maybe the Post will do a follow up? Maybe if our Senators are responsible?

[rzemanfl]

34. I saw somewhere the claim that in British English "fixed around"

means "bolted onto" any Brits out there that can comment? "Bolted onto" makes little sense in the context of the sentence.

[CJCRANE]

66. It's nonsense.

I haven't checked but I'm guessing that no British news source has used this definition. "Fixed around" means the same thing in British and American English.

[rzemanfl]

67. I think so to, but would like to hear it from someone from a person

who lives in a ham or a shire.

[CJCRANE]

70. I live in both!

I live in England and have a B.A. Hons in English Literature...

[Tiggeroshii]

71. Maybe if...

If you fix around a plank onto a ship, I could imagine the plank being bolted onto the ship. But when intelligence is fixed around policy, I could imagine some jerk going out of his desperate way to persuade the American public to firmly approve his war. I just don't see why the use of the word would really be that different either.

[slamthecrank]

74. yea

Either "bolted onto" or "shaped to" makes no difference.

If you "bolt" intellegence "onto" a policy, that makes the intellegence false, by definition - which is perjury in court. Either definition creates the same reality from these memos.

[CJCRANE]

78. It is pretty much the same thing...

but for the record, I've never heard a carpenter say he's "fixing around" a piece of wood, or a mechanic say he's "fixing around" a component onto a chassis, or a plumber say he's "fixing around" a drainage pipe onto a wall...

[rzemanfl]

79. And I go post "from someone from a person..." Thanks. n/t

[dalloway]

32. Thank GOODNESS for the UK where there is still a free press!n/t

[liam97]

35. The problem with the WP story

is that focuses attention away from the impeachable offense to bad admin (having no after plans). But I will take this for now!

[quaoar]

43. No it doesn't

It focuses attention on once again. For stories to stay in th news there must be new developments. This is a new development.

[creeksneakers2]

36. They are ignoring the real story

Bush and Blair were plotting to get an excuse to go to war. They wanted Saddam to refuse to cooperate with weapons inspections.

Bush issued an ultimatum that Saddam turn over vast quantities of WMD or face regime change. There was no way for Saddam to turn over the weapons, and Bush likely knew it.

The Washington Post published a totally different story than the Times of London published. The media can no longer ignore the Downing Street memo scandal, so they are trying to mis-characterize what the scandal is about.

This latest memo is further evidence that John Bolton engineered the firing of the head of a UN arms control agency so that the plot to gain a prefix for war could proceed. That should be looked into.

I'm sending E-mails again. The fact that this story was published at all shows that what we are doing is working.

[liam97]

38. Perhaps the Times story should be the first

on the DU homepage

[liam97]

39. New Raw Story headline

which points attention to WAPO whitewashing!

[kentuck]

45. Obviously, the British were unable to persuade Dubya...

19. Even with a legal base and a viable military plan, we would still need to ensure that the benefits of action outweigh the risks. In particular, we need to be sure that the outcome of the military action would match our objective as set out in paragraph 5 above. A post-war occupation of Iraq could lead to a protracted and costly nation-building exercise. As already made clear, the US military plans are virtually silent on this point. Washington could look to us to share a disproportionate share of the burden. Further work is required to define more precisely the means by which the desired endstate would be created, in particular what form of Government might replace Saddam Hussein's regime and the timescale within which it would be possible to identify a successor. We must also consider in greater detail the impact of military action on other UK interests in the region.

[understandinglife]

47. New York Times on the WaPo article

At least they are linking to the AP report on the WaPo article:
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Iraq-Postwar.html?

Peace.


www.missionnotaccomplished.us - Please, everyone, don't stop at 500,000 signatures; don't stop at 10,000,000 signatures; don't stop until Bush and the neoconsters are indicted and prosecuted for their heinous crimes against humanity and our Constitution.

[truth_is_extreme]

48. anyone with half a brain

could see this back in 2002 and 2003. The administration was pushing for war the same way a toddler wants a toy and wants it NOW.

Not only the entire Bush cabinet deserves to rot in jail, but also the senators who voted to give him power to mass-murder for oil.

In the meantime, the corrupt American media can only cover Condolezza Rice playing piano at the Kennedy Center. That war criminal playing piano, that's entertainment!

[joefromcanada]

50. pentagon papers

just athought, is this like the pentagon papers, in so much as a blueprint for a war that the big companies needed to make thier profit margins soar?

[chomskysright]

64. The NEW Pentagon Papers: Salon: Dr. Karen Kwiatkowski, retired AF

DR. KWIATKOWSKI IS TO SPEAK,THE BELOW PERSON WHOSE ARTICLE IS FEATURED IN SALON, WITH ME AND 2 OTHERS, AT A MEETING AT THE AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION, WASHINGTON D.C., IN AUGUST, 2005.

YOU'RE INVITED: LOOK FOR THE DIVISION 32, HUMANISTIC PSYCHOLOGY, HOSPITALITY SUITE MEETING SCHEDULE OR CONTACT ME BACK-CHANNEL AND I WILL GIVE YOU INFO.

The new Pentagon papers
A high-ranking military officer reveals how Defense Department extremists suppressed information and twisted the truth to drive the country to war.

- - - - - - - - - - - -
By Karen Kwiatkowski



March 10, 2004 | In July of last year, after just over 20 years of service, I retired as a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Air Force. I had served as a communications officer in the field and in acquisition programs, as a speechwriter for the National Security Agency director, and on the Headquarters Air Force and the office of the secretary of defense staffs covering African affairs. .....

From May 2002 until February 2003, I observed firsthand the formation of the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans and watched the latter stages of the neoconservative capture of the policy-intelligence nexus in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. This seizure of the reins of U.S. Middle East policy was directly visible to many of us working in the Near East South Asia policy office, and yet there seemed to be little any of us could do about it.

...I witnessed neoconservative agenda bearers within OSP usurp measured and carefully considered assessments, and through suppression and distortion of intelligence analysis promulgate what were in fact falsehoods to both Congress and the executive office of the president. ....

felt that this agenda, whatever its flaws or merits, had never been openly presented to the American people. Instead, the public story line was a fear-peddling and confusing set of messages, designed to take Congress and the country into a war of executive choice, a war based on false pretenses, and a war one year later Americans do not really understand. That is why I have gone public with my account.....

Co-workers who had watched the transition from Clintonista to Bushite shared conversations and stories indicating that something deliberate and manipulative was happening to NESA .....

At the time, I didn't realize that the expertise on Middle East policy was not only being removed, but was also being exchanged for that from various agenda-bearing think tanks, including the Middle East Media Research Institute, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, and the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs. Interestingly, the office director billet stayed vacant the whole time I was there. That vacancy and the long-term absence of real regional understanding to inform defense policymakers in the Pentagon explains a great deal about the neoconservative approach on the Middle East and the disastrous mistakes made in Washington and in Iraq in the past two years.....

I soon saw the modus operandi of "instant policy" unhampered by debate or experience with the early Bush administration replacement of the civilian head of the Israel, Lebanon and Syria desk office with a young political appointee from the Washington Institute, David Schenker.

[quaoar]

52. Actually, there was a lot of planning for post-war Iraq

Here are the Top 10 plans drawn up by the Bush junta:

1. Once the ticker-tape parades were over, it would be on to Damascus!
2. Baghdad is nice, but "Real Men Go To Teheran!"
3. Plans were drawn up for the best route across Syria to get Iraqi oil to the Mediterranean Sea.
4. Sites were scouted out for the new Israeli Embassy in Baghdad.
5. The Pentagon was trying to make sure they had enough trucks to haul off all the rose petals that would be showered on our troops by grateful Iraqis.
6. Many hours were spent calculating how deep the tax cuts would need to be to finance the war in Iraq.
7. Iraqi towns were to be renamed. Tikrit woiuld become Halliburtonia. Fallujah would be Perleville.
8. Laws would have to be passed -- to avoid confusion -- limiting the number of Iraqi infants that could be named after George Bush.
9. Hotels and other accommodations would have to be provided to handle all the Christian Coalition missionaries who would convert millions of grateful Iraqis.
10. God will provide.

[NVMojo]

53. ...of course, death and destruction were the PNAC goal ...

[manxkat]

62. starting with the neocons pulling off 9/11

[Douglas Carpenter]

68. Let's also keep at the media--we're getting somewhere

:bounce:


Just a reminder of some very, very important links:

To sign Congressman Conyers’ letter

http://www.johnconyers.campaignoffice.com


To put and keep pressure on the Mainstream Media:

http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/takeaction.html#awaken


http://www.afterdowningstreet.org


LISTEN TO THE RANDI RHODES SHOW-to keeps up daily with what’s going on with--THE DOWNING STREET MEMO:

http://www.therandirhodesshow.com


Peace
O8)

Here is my standard letter to the Media:


Dear Sir/Madam:

As you know, on May 1 of this year a document now commonly referred to as “|The Downing Street Memo” was released into the British Press. This document raises serious question about how the administration was handling intelligence related to Iraq and appears to suggest that the Bush Administration had already decided on war when publicly it was claiming that no such decision had been made. Now further documents have been released in the British media which cast even further doubts.

These documents and perhaps other documents suggest that the Bush administration was determined to “fix intelligence” around a predetermined policy. Some of these documents make it clear that the administration had no credible plan for dealing with the post-war occupation.

It is most disturbing that there has been a virtual media blackout regarding “The Downing Street Memo” and other disturbing documents.

Even more disturbing is the absence in the America media of any credible discussion or coverage regarding strong, credible and independent evidence that the Bush Administration intentionally mislead the U.S. Congress, the media and the American people.

I do hope you will accept the responsibility to address this issue and provide serious investigative journalism into this matter.

Furthermore, on Thursday June 16, 2005, Rep. John Conyers, Jr., ranking minority member of the House Judiciary Committee, and other House members will hold a hearing to consider testimony concerning the Downing Street minutes and questions of possible fixing of prewar intelligence. I do hope you will be giving full coverage to these events.

Sincerely,

[Pystoff]

72. The "W" show

"Hey everybody lookit me I can start a war DuuuuuuuuuuRRRRR" :dunce:

"What do you mean I have to finish it!!!!"

"Clean up after myself WhhhAAAA!!!!" :nuke:

[Stand and Fight]

75. Kick for tomorrow to read. n/t

[FreedomAngel82]

76. Disgusting

Sounds to me like they were planning on leaving the country in rambles. :mad: Bastards! This also explains the "missing" money. I bet you it went right back to Cheney. Where is all the money that Bush keeps asking the Senate/Congress for going to??