 |
Add to My Group
Iraq - Why we REALLY went to war
By Steven Leser (about the author) Page 1 of 2 page(s)
For OpEdNews: Steven Leser - Writer
The debate over why we went to war in Iraq has raged ever since the current Bush administration began to publicly discuss removing Saddam Hussein from power in 2002, almost a year before the war began. It is difficult to think of any important decision in US Presidential history where the motivations were so viscerally questioned. Republicans seem to have little problem with Bush's two step from presenting American security from Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction as the primary reason from war, to a shift to Democracy in Iraq and removal of a dictator harmful to his own people when WMD were not found. Democrats, for their part, have offered a number of theories as to the 'Real' reasons we went to war in Iraq, from a grab of Iraqi oil, to correcting a mistake of the President's father, former President George H. W. Bush or avenging a botched attempt on the former President's life. I have listened to every theory and carefully researched each one. What I have discovered is that none of the popular theories or explanations on either side of the political aisle makes sense. I will list and discuss each theory below, and then I will explain what I have deduced to be the correct reason and why it is the only one that makes sense given the facts.
1) We went to war to protect the United States from Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction. There are three reasons why this theory did not make sense as of March 26, 2003, the day we went to war in Iraq.
a. Iraq possessed no method to deliver WMD to the United States. Iraq had no Strategic Bombers capable of making the trip, had no submarines capable of getting within range of the United States to deliver the weapons, and had no ballistic missiles capable of reaching the United States. In fact, Iraq had no delivery systems capable of delivering WMD beyond Asia Minor.
b. Despite their protestations to the contrary regarding 'intelligence mistakes', as of March 6, 2003, over two weeks before hostilities began, the administration knew that there was a good chance there were no WMD in Iraq. How do I know this for a fact? The UN weapons inspectors had been on the ground in Iraq for five months before the war and had issued their reports on March 6, 2003 indicating that in five months of on the ground inspections, they were receiving adequate cooperation from the Iraqis and had found no evidence that Iraq continued to possess Weapons of Mass Destruction.
c. In a last minute attempt to avert war, 24 hours before hostilities began, Saddam Hussein made an offer to Bush that in effect said, he will allow US military forces into the country to check any sites they wish for WMD if we still doubted his word that Iraq had no more WMD, but he didn't want war and didn't want to be removed from power. Bush refused. The administration has successfully prevented widespread dissemination of this information.
2) We went to war to bring Democracy to the Iraqis and remove a brutal dictator from power.
a. The most obvious issue with this is that George Bush said precious little about this before the war and before the embarrassment over no WMD being found. Moreover, Bush said nothing about this during his Presidential campaign or before 2002. Did Saddam suddenly become these things between 2002 and 2003?
b. Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia, just to cover some of the Middle East, are all countries whose regimes were, and continue to be as brutal as that of Saddam Hussein. In just one example, in 2002, 15 schoolgirls were burned to death in Saudi Arabia because police would not allow them to flee a burning building without donning the proper attire for a Muslim woman.
c. The most brutal period of Iraq and Saddam Hussein occurred in the late 1980s, during the Presidencies of Reagan and George H. W. Bush. It was during this time that Saddam used poison gas against the Kurds and other dissident groups in Iraq. The US simply looked the other way because he was our ally.
d. China, among other countries, not only is not under consideration for attack from the United States but it enjoys Most Favored Nation Trading Status with us despite having a horribly repressive and non democratic regime regularly guilty of torturing and killing political dissidents.
3) We went to war to get Iraqi Oil.
a. If this were the case, one would expect that getting Iraqi oil production up to prewar and even pre Desert Shield/Desert Storm levels would be a priority for the administration and for those whom they granted Iraq contracts. This has not been the case. The administration has failed to provide adequate security for Iraqi oil facilities and pipelines and production has lagged far behind previous milestones. See http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/22/business/worldbusiness/22petrol.html?ex=1285041600&en=41dc08c53ea78d1f&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
b. Aside from production, the above article also points to the fact that Iraqi oil companies are still firmly in control of Iraqi oil. This does not bode well for the theory that US went to war in Iraq to grab Iraq's oil.
4) George W. Bush went to war in Iraq to avenge a botched attempt on his father's life or to finish the job that his father started. This was a pleasant side effect for George W. Bush, but hardly the primary reason. In fact, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz among other future members of the Bush administration, had been pulling for war against Iraq to remove Hussein since 1998 when they were both members of the same Right Wing think tank, the Project for the New American Century. They wrote a letter to then President Clinton that outlined their reasoning http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm . This letter, sent on January 28, 1998 was almost a full three years before George W. Bush was even sworn in as President. Clearly, the architecting of a reason to attack Iraq did not start with George W. Bush, and had little to do with the events of September 11th. When Clinton did not respond, Project for a New American Century wrote to the Republican leaders of congress a few months later, also with minimal response. In fact, Iraq was contained. UN Weapons Inspectors were on the ground, and the US Air Force was flying combat air patrol missions over more than 60% of Iraq around the clock. Any Iraqi military forces that even hinted at aggression were immediately bombed. There was no way Iraq was able to present a danger to any other country with US Airplanes constantly flying overhead.
1 | 2
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
 Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
 View Authors' Articles |
by Tim Pritchard
$7.99
Lowest New Price $4.56
Number of pages: 384
Publisher: Presidio Press
by William R. Polk
$13.95
Lowest New Price $6.04
Number of pages: 240
Publisher: Harper Perennial
by Stephen Kinzer
$17.00
Lowest New Price $6.97
Number of pages: 416
Publisher: Times Books
by Thomas E. Ricks
$16.00
Lowest New Price $5.00
Number of pages: 512
Publisher: Penguin (Non-Classics)
| 5 comments |
Want to post your own comment on this Article? 
|
||||
|
||||||||||||||
Must Read (0) 
Well Said (0) 
News (0) 
Touching (0) 
Funny (0) 
Supported (0) 
Interesting (0) 
Inspiring (0) 
Valuable (0) Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |
