January 2003: "War on Iraq will Open Pandora's Box in Mideast"

[leftchick]

Who could have predicted??? I remember reading so many foreign sourced stories like this in the build up to war that the US media would not TOUCH!!!

:argh:

http://english.people.com.cn/200301/29/eng20030129_110934.shtml

<snip>


It is widely believed that with this war the United States is attempting not only to overthrow Saddam Hussein's regime but end many long-existing problems in the Mideast. By overpowering Iraq, one of the US-called "axis of evil", the United States hopes to weed out the potential threat of mass destructive weapons in the Middle East, strike a blow to the radical Arab forces against Israel, and increase control of the Gulf region's oil resources.

However, as Li Guofu, a Middle East expert from the China Institute of International Studies, and many other researchers point out, no matter what intentions the United States harbors, a military action against Iraq with no mandate from the United Nations will bring nothing but turbulence to Iraq, its neighbors and the Middle East region at large. For Iraq, the war will reshuffle its political structure and breed possible power struggles. According to Tang Zhichao, a researcher from the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations, the United States will find it hard to form a powerful central government in post-war Iraq since the Kurds in the north will clamor for more autonomy while the majority Shiite Muslims will endeavor to change the previous dominance of the minority Sunni Muslims.

Besides, Tang warns, a pro-America government is likely to elicit violence from Iraq's extremist forces or Saddam's loyalists.

For nations bordering Iraq like Iran and Syria, confronted with the strong military presence of the United States and political pressure from a pro-America Iraqi government, Li Guofu believes they will feel increasingly in danger. In Iran in particular, already hair-trigger sensitive at the "axis of evil" label, anti-US forces will become even more radical. Syria, a close economic partner of Iraq and a strong protester at US military actions, will also feel under pressure.

[ixion]

1. If we go through the DU archives, we can find thousands of posts

exploring and/or elaborating on this very issue.

It was common knowledge to anyone who had ever cracked a history book.

It's funny now how the M$M has 'forgotten' about all this. :eyes:

[underpants]

2. I shouldn't be but I am still amazed at how right the anti-war movement was

I shouldn't be because this was a "no brainer" and because many experts agreed that this would be the outcome. Hell the CIA even said (and every year since) that the most likely outcome would be civil war.

See how the propaganda works? I was even convinced to hedge my bets and add caveats when answering the WMD question to friends. Amazing.

[Stevepol]

3. You can't help but be influenced by these liars with a bully pulpit.

Don't feel bad. I heard Bush say at Camp David in September of 2002, Blair at his side, that the IAEC in its latest report before it was pushed out of Iraq, had said that Iraq could have a bomb in 6 months.

At the time, I thought Well maybe Bush is right. Maybe it is better to invade. We certainly wouldn't want this in the hands of Saddam and 6 months is a pretty short time.

But this statement was an outright lie. A few weeks later, a member of the ever alert media decided to pick up the phone and call the IAEC to find out about this report (a reporter from that "liberal" publication the Washington Times no less). What he found out was that such a report didn't exist, at least no official report like that existed or has ever existed. There was a news report at the time from the IAEC that Iraq couldn't even BEGIN to work on a bomb for 5 YEARS! And that's about it.

Nobody really pressed Bush to explain the source of this totally outrageous lie. His press secy was asked about it and he said Bush was thinking about an article in some obscure British magazine published after the first Iraq War, a statement that in itself was even more fabulous considering Bush's reading propensities and certainly a lie.

This is the type of lie that was used to market this war. And there was one after another, an assembly line of lies. The average TV viewer or citizen is helpless faced with this kind of crap.

[underpants]

4. "Just because you have a 'Beware of Dog' sign....

doesn't mean you have a dog"-Hans Blix

I remember the false 6 month report but I remember Ari Fleischer telling it and the IAEA very nicely saying that he seems to be mistaken, Ari then said that it was after the first Gulf war, the IAEA very diplomatically responded to reporters inquiries saying that he might be mistaken, Ari then said that it was BEFORE the first Gulf War.....this was mentioned once in the MSM and never spoken of again.

[leftchick]

6. that is exactly my point

This is a GREAT BIG FAT I TOLD YOU SO to the fucking M$M!!! It amazes me how they have gotten away with it and how many had to die because they didn't do their jobs.

:argh:

[DemonFighterLives]

5. First he states that there are no plans for war on his desk

and then the gleeful little b*stard is shouting "shock and awe", "shock and awe". He is just sick, no two ways about it.
When Iraq issued the weapons declaration, dubby's gang intercepted it and removed most of the information whick I'm sure implicated Rummy the Impaler and the U.S.

Of course a guy like David Kelly(hope I got the name right) had to die to keep Britain's lies safe.
:dem: