T Nation

Questions About Iraq

I have some questions regarding U.S. relations with Iraq. They seem to me to be very important questions, yet are never addressed in the mainstream media or by either of the canidates.

By default, the reason proffered for the invasion of Iraq was the need to oust Saddam and install a democracy in the region to be an example. The questions raised are,

  1. Why did the U.S. work to overthrow a democratically elected govt. in Iran and install the Shah?

2.Why did the U.S. continue to support Saddam even after he had comitted the worst of his atrocities?

  1. While Saddam was massing troops on the border of Kuwait, he asked the U.S. ambassador to Iraq for permission to invade. Why did April Gillespie tell him “don’t worry, it would be viewed as an Arab-Arab matter?”

  2. In 1991 there was a rebellion against Saddam. At one point the rebels controllrd 14 of the 18 provinces. Why did the U.S. allow troops loyal to Saddam free passage to put down the rebellion and why was the no fly ban lifted, allowing Saddam to use his helicopter gunships for the same purpose?

I guess only our goverment knows the real answers,but I do know the only reason were over there is for the oil.9/11 was just a good excuse.

dubbs64 wrote, “I guess only our government knows the real answers”

If we live in a true drmocracy, isn’t it our responsibility as citizens to find out? In our system of checks and balances, we must have an INFORMED electorate to act as the ultimate check on our govt. abusing it’s vast power.

Our govt. does know and thanks to the Freedom of Information Act you can too, albeit 40-50 years later. George Kennan wrote in 1948 as the head of a State Department planning committee [remember this was not origanally written for public consumption]
“We have about 50 percent of the world’s wealth but only 6.3 percent of its population. In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity without positive detriment to our national security. To do so, we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming; and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives. We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford today the luxury of altruism and world-benefaction. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts.”

Like ALL governments, the U.S. govt. is not guided in its decisions by a moral compass. Its "shock"ing and "awe"some power is in service to the powerful, i.e. Halliburton, the oil industry, and other various corporate interests.France opposed the war not because of any altruistic beliefs against war, but because those who stood to profit from the status quo were able to exert more influence upon their govt. than any pro-war faction.

When the lapdog press found it impossible to ignore that Bush’s original reasons for the need to initiate an unprovoked invasion were false, the Bush-Cheney cabal settled on the excuse of bringing “freedom” to Iraq. They have spun bullshit into “world-benefaction.” The real reason was the “immediate national objectives” of gaining control of IRAQ’S oil and to establish a large base of U.S.military power in the heart of the world’s largest oil producing region.

George W. Bush proclaims himself to be a Christian. “Judge them not by their words, you shall know them by their deeds.” Is the killing of 100,000 for Oil the act of a Christian? Oh my God, 100,000 people. George W. Bush worships Mammon.