American Empire, War Politics

Cheney’s Reasons for Invading Iraq – According to Cheney Himself

Some of us in the church have begun to feel like captives on an Alfred Hitchcock movie set — so many fellow believers are putting stock in every word the Bush Administration is saying!

The following can be useful in proving that the reasons given for the Iraq war are lies. There are those who believe that the election of ’04 was a “moral victory.” Here’s my question for them: Is it moral to lust to rule the entire world, and develop the most costly, deadly arsenal in history to do it?

Unfortunately, that question is not overstated, because Dick Cheney satisfies this description and can tell you all about it in his own words. He and other top members of Bush’s administration (Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz) have publicly posted their ambitions on the internet since 1997 at NewAmericanCentury.org. The purpose of the material on that website is to explain a massive build-up of armaments by the U.S.

The “Statement of Principles” page is the one which bears Cheney’s signature and others. They pull no punches – the goal is that the U.S. should actively seek to rule the world. Interestingly, since it was written in 1997 (long before 9/11), the amount of attention dedicated to defense or terrorism is much less than concerns about economic dominance. This is one very telling article, on account of its date, because what the administration would now have us believe is that all the military build-up is about terrorism. This article confirms that military build-up was the plan long ago.

Further giving the lie to arguments about going to war because of Saddam Hussein is some text in the “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” document, dated June 3, 2000. Note that this was also published before 9/11. There we read the following concerning Saddam Hussein (emphasis mine):

“… Though the immediate mission of those forces is to enforce the no-fly zones over northern and southern Iraq, they represent the long-term commitment of the United States and its major allies to a region of vital importance. Indeed, the United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.” (page 26 of Acrobat download (right column), which is page 14 in the text of the document)

Why take another’s word for it? Let the architects of the Iraq slaughter tattle on themselves.

This is a sorrowful time, to see so many in the church being duped by lies. As one friend put it, “it’s like they’re all under a spell.” Let’s all pray that some information like this might open a few eyes.

Hits: 47

27 Comments

  • To: The Most Dangerous Man

    I must congratulate you sir! It has been some time since I have seen a statement that is both specious and ad hominem. While I no use for billy c. or dubya (and have a modest proposal below as a possible remedy) I must point out just a few of the glaring holes in what you wrote. 1. The clinton admin did pursue, capture and incarcerate the perpetrators of first WTC bombing. 2. 19 out of 20 the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis; question-why are we in Iraq and not Saudi Arabia? 3. Why has the dubya and repubs put less effort into capturing osssama bin laden, and more in Iraq? 4. Who is making a fortune off the current war on terrorism? It appears to me your statement makes you a fallacymonger.

    fal·la·cy P Pronunciation Key (fls)
    n. pl. fal·la·cies
    1. A false notion.
    2. A statement or an argument based on a false or invalid inference.
    3. Incorrectness of reasoning or belief; erroneousness.
    4. The quality of being deceptive.

    [Alteration of Middle English fallace, from Old French, from Latin fallcia, deceit, from fallx, fallc, deceitful, from fallere, to deceive.]
    Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition

    mon·ger P Pronunciation Key (mnggr, mng)
    n.
    1. A dealer in a specific commodity. Often used in combination: an ironmonger.
    2. A person promoting something undesirable or discreditable. Often used in combination: a scandalmonger; a warmonger.

    tr.v. mon·gered, mon·ger·ing, mon·gers
    To peddle.

    [Middle English mongere, from Old English mangere, from Latin mang, dealer in slaves, probably of Greek origin.]
    Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
    Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
    Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

    Hence a fallacymonger is one who: deals in, or peddles false notions or ideas, makes statements based on incorrect or false reasoning. Bush and Bliar’s pre-Iraq war assertions about Irag’s WMD’s is an example of fallacymongering.

    My Modest Proposal to avoid bad candidates: At then end of every slate of candidates for any office, at any level; local, state or federal the last ballot choice is: NONE OF THE ABOVE

  • go read some books, people.
    We can bury our heads in the sand, and pretend terror is a 6 letter word, or go ”
    get em”.
    Bush and company aren’t honest angels, but neight are Dems. Still…. someone bombed the twin towers on CLINTON’s WATCH in 93(Oh, how soon we forgot).
    Why? If clinton was so great, why did they attack the bld, kill a few people?
    Hunh? Why? Same reason why they killed 3000 in 2001! THEY are Terrorists, and do not care whom is president!
    They hate Crhistians and Jewish people,a nd even hate themselves, i bet( You have Sunnis disliking Kiurds, for example).
    Get over this politiical tripe.

    How do you fend off a bully? By giving him your lunch money, on a daily basis, or give him “one upside the head”?

    From some news on the radio today , sounds like we can not fully trust the CIA/FBIA/IOU, LOL!

    One dept claimed to have known about 3 of the terrorists who flew planes into buildings, but did not share it with the correct dept, so they could be questioned, and maybe deported(some had expired visas?).
    Not all terrorists are Muslims, eitehr..see Tim Mc Veigh, disgruntled with the US Govt(he served in gulf war I)…and he did his dirty deed during clintons watch: Shoudl We Blame Bill?
    roll-Eyes!

    Anyone who has never sinned, cast the first stone!

    Peace Be With You All!
    Protect America and forget poltically correctness!

  • Hello, a really interesting experience to visit your website. For sure i will come back soon. greets to all !

  • Well I still watch the weather channel, and there are worthwhile history programs, etc. It’s just that it’s so much like foraging for your lunch out of a dumpster.

Leave a Comment

 
Share
Share
Tweet
Email
Clip