The War On Terror

JBeee

Time Out
Jun 1, 2007
1,826
52
48
By Paul Craig Roberts October 15, 2010

Does anyone remember the "cakewalk war" that would last six weeks, cost $50-$60 billion, and be paid for out of Iraqi oil revenues?

Does anyone remember that White House economist Lawrence Lindsey was fired by Dubya because Lindsey estimated that the Iraq war could cost as much as $200 billion?

Lindsey was fired for over-estimating the cost of a war that, according to Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes, has cost 15 times more than Lindsey estimated. And the US still has 50,000 troops in Iraq.

Does anyone remember that just prior to the US invasion of Iraq, the US government declared victory over the Taliban in Afghanistan?

Does anyone remember that the reason Dubya gave for invading Iraq was Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, weapons that the US government knew did not exist?

Are Americans aware that the same neoconservatives who made these fantastic mistakes, or told these fabulous lies, are still in control of the government in Washington?

The "war on terror" is now in its tenth year. What is it really all about?

The bottom line answer is that the "war on terror" is about creating real terrorists. The US government desperately needs real terrorists in order to justify its expansion of its wars against Muslim countries and to keep the American people sufficiently fearful that they continue to accept the police state that provides "security from terrorists," but not from the government that has discarded civil liberties.

The US government creates terrorists by invading Muslim countries, wrecking infrastructure and killing vast numbers of civilians. The US also creates terrorists by installing puppet governments to rule over Muslims and by using the puppet governments to murder and persecute citizens as is occurring on a vast scale in Pakistan today.

Neoconservatives used 9/11 to launch their plan for US world hegemony. Their plan fit with the interests of America’s ruling oligarchies. Wars are good for the profits of the military/security complex, about which President Eisenhower warned us in vain a half century ago. American hegemony is good for the oil industry’s control over resources and resource flows. The transformation of the Middle East into a vast American puppet state serves well the Israel Lobby’s Zionist aspirations for Israeli territorial expansion.

Most Americans cannot see what is happening because of their conditioning. Most Americans believe that their government is the best on earth, that it is morally motivated to help others and to do good, that it rushes aid to countries where there is famine and natural catastrophes. Most believe that their presidents tell the truth, except about their sexual affairs.

The persistence of these delusions is extraordinary in the face of daily headlines that report US government bullying of, and interference with, virtually every country on earth. The US policy is to buy off, overthrow, or make war on leaders of other countries who represent their peoples’ interests instead of American interests. A recent victim was the president of Honduras who had the wild idea that the Honduran government should serve the Honduran people.

The American government was able to have the Honduran president discarded, because the Honduran military is trained and supplied by the US military. It is the same case in Pakistan, where the US government has the Pakistani government making war on its own people by invading tribal areas that the Americans consider to be friendly to the Taliban, al-Qaeda, "militants" and "terrorists."

Earlier this year a deputy US Treasury secretary ordered Pakistan to raise taxes so that the Pakistani government could more effectively make war on its own citizens for the Americans. On October 14 US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ordered Pakistan to again raise taxes or the US would withhold flood aid. Clinton pressured America’s European puppet states to do the same, expressing in the same breath that the US government was worried by British cuts in the military budget. God forbid that the hard-pressed British, still reeling from American financial fraud, don’t allocate enough money to fight America’s wars.

On Washington’s orders, the Pakistani government launched a military offensive against Pakistani citizens in the Swat Valley that killed large numbers of Pakistanis and drove millions of civilians from their homes. Last July the US instructed Pakistan to send its troops against the Pakistani residents of North Waziristan. On July 6, Jason Ditz reported on Antiwar.com that "at America’s behest, Pakistan has launched offensives against [the Pakistani provinces of] Swat Valley, Bajaur, South Waziristan, Orakzai, and Khyber."
A week later Israel’s US Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) called for escalating the Obama Administration’s policies of US airstrikes against Pakistan’s tribal areas. On September 30, the Pakistani newspaper, The Frontier Post, wrote that the American air strikes "are, plain and simple, a naked aggression against Pakistan."

The US claims that its forces in Afghanistan have the right to cross into Pakistan in pursuit of "militants." Recently US helicopter gunships killed three Pakistani soldiers whom they mistook for Taliban. Pakistan closed the main US supply route to Afghanistan until the Americans apologized.

Pakistan warned Washington against future attacks. However, US military officials, under pressure from Obama to show progress in the endless Afghan war, responded to Pakistan’s warning by calling for expanding the Afghan war into Pakistan. On October 5 the Canadian journalist Eric Margolis wrote that "the US edges closer to invading Pakistan."
In his book, Obama’s Wars, Bob Woodward reports that America’s puppet president of Pakistan, Asif Ali Zardari, believes that terrorist bombing attacks inside Pakistan for which the Taliban are blamed are in fact CIA operations designed to destabilize Pakistan and allow Washington to seize Pakistan’s nuclear weapons.

To keep Pakistan in line, the US government changed its position that the "Times Square Bombing" was the work of a "lone wolf." Attorney General Eric Holder switched the blame to the "Pakistani Taliban," and Secretary of State Clinton threatened Pakistan with "very serious consequences" for the unsuccessful Times Square bombing, which likely was a false flag operation aimed at Pakistan.

To further heighten tensions, on September 1 the eight members of a high-ranking Pakistani military delegation en route to a meeting in Tampa, Florida, with US Central Command, were rudely treated and detained as terrorist suspects at Washington DC’s Dulles Airport.

For decades the US government has enabled repeated Israeli military aggression against Lebanon and now appears to be getting into gear for another Israeli assault on the former American protectorate. On October 14 the US government expressed its "outrage" that the Lebanese government had permitted a visit by Iranian President Ahmadinejad, who is the focus of Washington’s intense demonization efforts. Israel’s representatives in the US Congress threatened to stop US military aid to Lebanon, forgetting that US Rep. Howard Berman (D-CA) has had aid to Lebanon blocked since last August to punish Lebanon for a border clash with Israel.
Perhaps the most telling headline of all is the October 14 report, "Somalia’s New American Prime Minister." An American has been installed as the Prime Minister of Somalia, an American puppet government in Mogadishu backed up by thousands of Ugandan troops paid by Washington.

This barely scratches the surface of Washington’s benevolence toward other countries and respect for their rights, borders, and lives of their citizens.

Meanwhile, to silence the whistleblower website WikiLeaks and to prevent any more revelations of American war crimes, the "freedom and democracy" government in DC has closed down WikiLeaks’ donations by placing the company that collects its money on its "watch list" and by having the Australian puppet government blacklist WikiLeaks.
WikiLeaks is now akin to a terrorist organization. The American government’s practice of silencing critics will spread across the Internet.

Remember, they hate us because we have freedom and democracy, First Amendment rights, habeas corpus, respect for human rights, and show justice and mercy to all.
 

Highball

Council Member
Jan 28, 2010
1,170
1
38
JBeee,
Think about the success the US has had in it's War on Drugs. Both campaigns have been a huge black hole where the US taxpayers pour in their money and also the lives of their young. One little known fact is the War on Drugs has been responsible for many American deaths which have been unreported. But in each case the US Military/Industrial complex has been great enriched. That doesn't count those politicians who receive Honorariums and campaign donations from those industries. Are we safer now now due to the War on Terror? Possibly, but the costs are astronomical.
 

Just the Facts

House Member
Oct 15, 2004
4,162
43
48
SW Ontario
I don't think the "War on Terror" was ever characterized as a cakewalk. Quite the contrary, even Bush stated it would be a long and trying fight. The "cakewalk" was the war on Iraq itself, which it turned out in fact to be. There really wasn't much resistance to British and American forces rolling into Iraq.

Does anyone remember that the reason Dubya gave for invading Iraq was Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, weapons that the US government knew did not exist?

O gosh no, gee, forgot all about that. I wish more people would make an effort to remind us! :)
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
Unfortunately the invasion of Iraq had very little to do with the war on terror and quite an bit to do with G.W. Bush showing off for his father. It can be argued that the war in Iraq had quite the opposite effect of what was intended in that it tied up US resources that could have been much better used elsewhere and alienated most moderate Islamic states as well as turning many moderate Muslims outside of the Middle East and Pakistan against the United States. Sadly, the US managed to pull other nations such as Britain and Australia into the Iraqi debacle with it in much the same way that Canada got sucked into Afghanistan. That is a situation that Canada will remedy shortly when its promised ordeal in Afghanistan ends. It has been a hard lesson but let us hope that Canada has learned that following the US into any military action is an act that is best reviewed very carefully.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83
It takes time to resolve the war on terror. It takes time to resolve the war on poverty. It takes time to resolve the war on drugs. But the war on the economy should be resolved instantly. ;)
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
It takes time to resolve the war on terror. It takes time to resolve the war on poverty. It takes time to resolve the war on drugs. But the war on the economy should be resolved instantly. ;)
TWOT , my favourite banker construct. Amateur Terrorists are those who reject rape pillage and murder by the bankers. All that is required to effect legal terrorism is a state or states. Professional sanction is that easy. Canada is a terrorists state, Canadians are terrorists, we live off the bodies of the innocent the young and the aged, just because it makes good business sense.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
118,307
14,501
113
Low Earth Orbit
Canadians are terrorists, we live off the bodies of the innocent the young and the aged, just because it makes good business sense.
Most would immediately think it is foreigners who are feeling the brunt but in reality it is Canadians who are terrorized the most.
 

ironsides

Executive Branch Member
Feb 13, 2009
8,583
60
48
United States
Saddam violated the no fly zone and for that reason alone should have been annihilated. Which he was, then we should have left.
 

Unforgiven

Force majeure
May 28, 2007
6,770
137
63
"Mission Accomplished"
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
539
113
Regina, SK
Remember, they hate us because we have freedom and democracy, First Amendment rights, habeas corpus, respect for human rights, and show justice and mercy to all.
Oh sure. Anybody who subscribes to that bankrupt argument hasn't been paying attention and knows no history worth talking about.
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
539
113
Regina, SK
Not really, I'm saying stupid people don't know their history. It's not just Republicans, and not even most Republicans, who buy that crappy argument, I've seen some serious leftists make the same claim, and it has exactly no relevance to reality. What people hate is being invaded, occupied, and colonized, economically or militarily. That doesn't justify the response of murdering the innocent, but it goes a long way toward explaining it.
 

Cliffy

Standing Member
Nov 19, 2008
44,850
193
63
Nakusp, BC
Not really, I'm saying stupid people don't know their history. It's not just Republicans, and not even most Republicans, who buy that crappy argument, I've seen some serious leftists make the same claim, and it has exactly no relevance to reality. What people hate is being invaded, occupied, and colonized, economically or militarily. That doesn't justify the response of murdering the innocent, but it goes a long way toward explaining it.
Yup, there is a lot of stupid people on all sides. There are still some who think there were honourable and justifiable reasons for invading Afghanistan and Iraq. Revenge is never sweet.
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
I don't think the "War on Terror" was ever characterized as a cakewalk. Quite the contrary, even Bush stated it would be a long and trying fight. The "cakewalk" was the war on Iraq itself, which it turned out in fact to be. There really wasn't much resistance to British and American forces rolling into Iraq.



O gosh no, gee, forgot all about that. I wish more people would make an effort to remind us! :)

We are aware you are aware. We also noticed that a F%&*-up on that scale went unpunished. Every justification for war was a lie, yet no one was ever held accountable for all the resulting death and destruction, not to mention the hundreds of billions of wasted American tax payer money, dead American soldiers...
 

ironsides

Executive Branch Member
Feb 13, 2009
8,583
60
48
United States
We are aware you are aware. We also noticed that a F%&*-up on that scale went unpunished. Every justification for war was a lie, yet no one was ever held accountable for all the resulting death and destruction, not to mention the hundreds of billions of wasted American tax payer money, dead American soldiers...

It was not. Iraq violated the UN mandated no fly zone and destroyed Kurds. All this while under UN control. UN just watched and did nothing. Bush did the right thing destroying Saddam, what he did wrong was not getting out ASAP.

Afghanistan was warranted because Bin Laden and gang chose to hide there under the protection of local tribal leaders.
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
It was not. Iraq violated the UN mandated no fly zone and destroyed Kurds. All this while under UN control. UN just watched and did nothing. Bush did the right thing destroying Saddam, what he did wrong was not getting out ASAP.

Afghanistan was warranted because Bin Laden and gang chose to hide there under the protection of local tribal leaders.


That may be your perception IS. Unfortunately the reality is quite different.

In reality, American outrage regarding atrocities and terror is highly selective and often based on events which never happened and situations which don't exist.

Nov. 19, 2002
The Bush Administration insists its policy is zero tolerance of Iraqi violations of the latest UN Security Council resolution. Administration officials announced Monday that Iraq had violated that resolution by firing on coalition planes patrolling the "no-fly" zone over northern Iraq. But, in the same breath, they said the U.S. would not take the matter up at the UN Security Council, where any move to punish Iraqi violations would have to begin. What's going on? The reason the Bush Administration won't take the latest firefight to the Security Council is that most of the Council doesn't share Washington's interpretation of the resolution as it applies to the "no-fly" zone. UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has made clear that the international body does not view "no-fly" zone confrontations as a violation of the resolution. "Let me say that I don't think the Council will say that this is in contravention of the resolution that was recently passed," Annan told reporters Tuesday during a visit to Kosovo.

Read more: Why 'No-Fly' Zone Clashes Won't Trigger an Iraq War - TIME

Neither the UN nor Iraq recognized the American/British/French declared no-fly zones. Eventually the French couldn't hold their noses anymore and dropped out of the coalition to starve and bomb Iraq, setting the stage for the illegal 2003 invasion.

16 September 2004
Lessons of Iraq war underscore importance of UN Charter - Annan
Secretary-General Kofi Annan believes that the Iraq war in 2003 demonstrated the need for the international community to address the issue of preventive action in the context of Charter principles and showed the importance of joint efforts on matters of use of force, a United Nations spokesman said today. Responding to media questions about the Secretary-General's comments in a BBC interview, spokesman Fred Eckhard told a press briefing in New York that in his remarks the Secretary-General had reiterated his well-known position that the military action against Iraq was not in conformity with the UN Charter.
In the interview, Mr. Annan was repeatedly asked whether the war was "illegal." "Yes," he finally said, "I have indicated it is not in conformity with the UN Charter, from our point of view, and from the Charter point of view it was illegal."


I'm not claiming that Hussein was a nice man. Unlike the US leaders and mainstream media, I've been against Hussein since he rose to power and assassinated all his rivals in the early 80's.

How Did Iraq Get Its Weapons? We Sold Them
by Neil Mackay and Felicity Arbuthnot

THE US and Britain sold Saddam Hussein the technology and materials Iraq needed to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction.

...the US, under the successive administrations of Ronald Reagan and George Bush Sr, sold materials including anthrax, VX nerve gas, West Nile fever germs and botulism to Iraq right up until March 1992, as well as germs similar to tuberculosis and pneumonia...

...on May 2, 1986, two batches of bacillus anthracis -- the micro-organism that causes anthrax -- were shipped to the Iraqi Ministry of Higher Education, along with two batches of the bacterium clostridium botulinum, the agent that causes deadly botulism poisoning.

One batch each of salmonella and E coli were shipped to the Iraqi State Company for Drug Industries on August 31, 1987. Other shipments went from the US to the Iraq Atomic Energy Commission on July 11, 1988; the Department of Biology at the University of Basrah in November 1989; the Department of Microbiology at Baghdad University in June 1985; the Ministry of Health in April 1985 and Officers' City, a military complex in Baghdad, in March and April 1986.

The shipments to Iraq went on even after Saddam Hussein ordered the gassing of the Kurdish town of Halabja, in which at least 5000 men, women and children died. The atrocity, which shocked the world, took place in March 1988, but a month later the components and materials of weapons of mass destruction were continuing to arrive in Baghdad from the US.

...The United States provided the government of Iraq with 'dual use' licensed materials which assisted in the development of Iraqi chemical, biological and missile-system programs...
No doubt that Hussein was a brutal dictator and the US supported him during his worst years.

During his last 10 years as Iraqi dictator, (1993-2003), when he no longer had US support, he was responsible for far fewer Iraqi deaths and atrocities than the US since March 2003. In fact you'd be hard pressed to identify a single atrocity atributed to Hussein from 2000 to 2003 when the US invaded. Genocidal wars were hardly a rarity during that time frame...
http://forums.canadiancontent.net/international-politics/95341-un-report-drc-genocide-1998-a.html

By 1998, it was known Iraq no longer possessed a credible WMD, yet the crippling economic sanctions which killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children ground on, thanks to US/British vetoes on the UNSC.

In order to believe the current commentary, you'd have to have forgotten the previous versions:
http://spectator.org/archives/2008/01/29/mystery-of-the-wmds

Maybe this might help:
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/WMDlies.html?q=WMDlies.html

During the run up to the 2003 invasion, US policies were killing more Iraqis than Hussein:
Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it.

--60 Minutes (5/12/96)

If any of the above seems like a revelation, I suggest reading this book
Manufacturing Consent
 
Last edited:

Risus

Genius
May 24, 2006
5,373
25
38
Toronto
Saddam violated the no fly zone and for that reason alone should have been annihilated. Which he was, then we should have left.

A no fly violation is no reason for killing the guy. Bushinski just wanted to get the guy who tried to kill his father. Simple as that...