Saddam Husseing and Donald Rumsfeld
(Image by en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Saddam_rumsfeld.jpg) Permission Details DMCA
But if the reason for the attack
on Iraq was not WMD, but was just the pretext for war, then what was the reason
for the attack? Was it to get rid of Saddam Hussein? If that be the case explain why after his
death the US turned around and handpicked the next dictator who might have been
even worse than Hussein. No it was not
to get rid of the evil dictator who formerly was our good friend. We supported him
in his war with Iran for eight years, we provided him with the co-ordinates so
he could use chemical weapons against Iranian troops in that war. Let us not forget the infamous picture of Rumsfeld
shaking hands with his good friend Saddam Hussein, before he was dubbed the Hitler
of his country. No, it was not to get
rid of a dictator; that was merely another pretext used to attack Iraq.
A famous movie line of "you want the truth; you cannot handle the truth" applies here. If you have been drinking enormous quantities of government Kool-Aid over the years you will not comprehend the following, so read no farther. If you still have an open mind consider this. The plan of the US was simply to destroy all of Iraq as we know it and to reduce it to a zone of absolute anarchy, and that is exactly what has happened. Iraq is no longer a nation, but it is an area of tribal and sectarian anarchy, that resulted when the US smashed and bombed Iraq back into the Stone Age. All of its infrastructure was destroyed including water and sewage systems, bridges roads, and electrical systems. Just imagine what NYC might be like with 10 years of having no water, sewage, electricity, and no one to maintain order. NYC would be exactly like Iraq is now. Extremists would get weapons and begin to fight for turf control; this is an inevitable result of destroying a country, and the architects of US policy are not so stupid they did not realize and plan for all of this. The Iraqi army was immediately disbanded by the US, which insured there was no institution capable of maintaining a semblance of order.
Not convinced the architects of foreign policy have evil intentions? Consider another example, Libya. Once again we smashed a country with 7 months of nonstop bombing using the pretext of getting rid of another dictator. This time it was that other Hitler, Muammar Gaddafi, who formerly was our on-and-off good friend. The architects of war and destruction, once again led by corporate media, easily convinced you that it was necessary to bomb Benghazi to save its people. Huh??? Yes you bought into that argument, and off went the US on its massive bombing of Libya. Gaddafi was killed and Libya is no longer a functioning state. Media has long since moved onto to greener pastures, but those who follow the aftermath of the US destruction of Libya know that, just like Iraq, it is a failed state. It is no longer a country and mapmakers in the near future will wipe the boundaries of Libya off their maps. It no longer exists for the very same reason the boundaries of Iraq have disappeared. Anarchists, extremists, tribal chieftains, have taken over what used to be Libya, and it is a replica of Iraq. It is a block of land with no clear boundaries in a state of absolute anarchy. Death and violence have prevailed because the county was so devastated and left with no functioning government, it became the perfect breeding ground for the rise of anarchy and extremists. What happened in Iraq is exactly what happened in Libya. Was Libya an accident of stupidity, or part of an evil plan?
Could the architects of US foreign policy be so stupid they did not know what would happen when you smash a nation with massive military power? When they saw what happened in Iraq, why would they repeat the procedure in Libya? The folks who plan US foreign policy are not stupid; to the contrary, they are slick, intelligent, and possibly very evil.
Still choking on your Kool-Aid and cannot accept reality? Follow the events in Syria, which has been wracked by civil war now for several years. We have decided to enter that horrible situation and enter their civil war, but why? Once again, as in Libya and Iraq, the pretext being used is we will help the Syrian people by bombing them. How many times can you be fooled? Put down the Kool-Aid and think about bombing people to help them. In any event, Syria has a Hitler, just as did Libya and Iraq. His name is Assad and the architects of destruction have been itching to get at Syria now for several years. It almost occurred when those architects, with the capable assistance of the corporate media had you convinced that Assad had used gas and chemical weapons in his civil war, and once again the plan put forward was to bomb Syria to save its people, and it almost came to fruition. Those evil Russians stepped in and diplomatically got Assad to give up all his chemical weapons, which in fact, thanks to the Russians, has happened. But in preserving peace they foiled the plan of the architects of destruction, who had Syria in its bomb sights until the Russians interfered. Darn those Russians, but we will deal with them later said the architects of destruction.
In any case, it's hard to stop warmongers from making war, and the warmongers have yet another plan for Syria. We will enter the fray on the side of the moderates, even if there are none, and we will use this civil war as a pretext to eventually turn on Assad and get rid of this evil dictator. In helping the Syrian people in their civil war and getting rid of Assad, we will of course have to bomb Syria into oblivion, thus reducing it to yet another failed state. Take a look at a map of the Middle East and locate Syria, remember it, for the mapmakers will eventually erase it from the map, as it will become another failed state where anarchy and extremists prevail through death and destruction. You would be naive if you don't think the architects of destruction in the US State Department don't know this, and have it in their plan for bringing anarchy to the entire Middle East.
Once we dispose of Syria we will of course go after the big enchilada Iran. Iran is one of the loftiest goals of the warmongers, but rest assured they will go after it and try to eliminate it to from the map. Don't think so? Watch Congress destroy the attempt to negotiate a nuclear treaty with Iran. The warmongers minions are hard at work in the Congress trying to sabotage the deal with Iran, and they will succeed, which will pave the way for yet another war, with the goal of reducing Iran to a state of anarchy. Ambitious? Most certainly, but don't think Iran is the final goal. Those evil Russians will be next on the list and the architects of destruction are currently at work laying the foundation of anarchy by provoking the Ukraine and supplying them with money and weapons. We are currently spending millions of dollars fomenting unrest within Russia right now by funding opposition groups with the hope of tearing Russia apart and causing war and destruction. It is horribly frightening to realize the warmongers are so deranged they would be trying to provoke the Russians, a country that has H bombs aplenty. The warmongers, through their puppet agency NATO, are continually encroaching on Russia from all sides, and at some point the Russians will draw a line in the sand and say, cross that line and it's "game on". Won't that be nice?
The only thing left for readers to contemplate is "cui bono"? Who benefits from the anarchy and turmoil in the Middle East? It's really pretty obvious.