Skip to main content

View Diary: About that massive cover-up (121 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  While Clinton was still Prez, toward the end of (6+ / 0-)

    his second term, during the 2000 campaign, I recall a Republican, but don't recall which, mentioning interest in Iraq on a Sunday talkie. It was in passing, during a long-winded discussion of another point.

    I wish I could remember exactly what was said, because it sat me right up. I REALLY wanted Gore to win from that point onward much more so. I was not at all surprised when Iraq was called out, piggy-backed, immediately after the 9/11 attacks. They had their eyes on Iraq before they were in the White House.

    Benghazi ain't nuttin'. What BushCo did was really something. Something dark, wicked and covert.

    I believe in democracy, civil liberties, and the rule of law. That makes me a liberal, and I’m proud of it. - Paul Krugman

    by Gentle Giant on Sun Feb 24, 2013 at 02:05:51 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  PNAC was already calling for "regime change" in (5+ / 0-)

      Iraq in 1997.  It was their first step towards the eventual invasion and Americanization of the entire Middle East.

      Sadly, if you look at PNAC's papers from 1997-2003, you will find that every step they outlined then have all been pursued and continued by both the Dubya Administration and the Obama Administration.

      PNAC's agenda is now bipartisan.

      •  And it follows a precise continuation (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Eric Nelson, apimomfan2

        ...into the present moment. The embeds are deep.

        Denial is a drug.

        by Pluto on Sun Feb 24, 2013 at 04:58:21 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  one example of that is in the Pacific (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Pluto, Ender

          One of PNAC's "recommendations" back in 1996 was that the US Navy transfer a large portion of its assets to the western Pacific, especially in the area near the Malacca Straits. PNAC noted correctly that China gets most of its oil from the Middle east (the US, as an aside, gets virtually none), and ALL of that oil has to pass through the very narrow choking point of the Malacca Straits to reach China. And that gives the US an opportunity to place a strategic boot on China's throat. By building up an overwhelming military presence in that area, we maintain the option of shutting off the flow of oil to China, nearly completely, any time we want.

          And beginning with the Dubya Adminstration and continuing into the Obama Administration, we have done exactly that. (And conveniently enough, both administrations were able to use the fig leaf of "fighting Islamic terrorists in Indonesia" to do it.)

          Of course, China took notice of that, and took steps to counter it.  Directly as a result of the American move into the Malaccan Straits area, China began working to produce new anti-ship missiles and also developed and deployed its own aircraft carrier. Both of those new weapon systems are intended to keep the Straits open in the event of an American naval blockade.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site