Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

About those real reasons for the invasion of Iraq …

Posted by Joshua Holland at 12:00 PM on March 20, 2006.


There's no pay dirt in monocausal explanations.
funeral
coffin

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Echo Chamber in your
mailbox!

 

I got five e-mails today asking me why I didn't talk about the real reason the United States invaded Iraq in my piece on the front page.

Everyone's got his or her favorite "real reason." They all have a bit of truth, but they're all wrong.

That's because there is almost never one "real" cause of any foreign policy action. Look seriously at foreign policy formation and you'll see that FoPo is an extension of domestic politics, with all its varied constituents and interest groups. That's why all of the reasons thrown about for this war are correct, except the ones that the administration that started it have peddled.

So, yes, the guys at Lockheed and Boeing and Northrop Grumman and Raytheon and General Dynamics wanted this war because all wars are good for business.

And, yes, Bush's oil buddies wanted access to a big chunk of the world's petroleum reserves.

(Because I like accuracy, I replaced my 'No Blood For Oil' bumper sticker with a bumper-length banner reading: 'No blood for assuring a stable energy supply-chain to a global economy in which we're heavily invested.')

Yes, there were various stripes of Neo-cons and democratic imperialists and other PNAC-type ideologues who wanted to enforce a global 'rule set' centered around American hegemony.

And, yes, there were the boys from Halliburton and Bechtel and Dyncorp and Caci and Titan who wanted fat contracts to rebuild Iraq (which they've totally fucked up).

No doubt that there were good ole' boys from the Chamber of Commerce and AEI who George saw on the links or in the clubhouse and who told him how marvelous it would be to see what a fully privatized neo-liberal laboratory would look like in action.

I'm sure, too, that there were various Fundie Christian extremists who thought a big conflagration in the Middle East would set off the rapture.

And, yes, Likudniks -- both American and Israeli -- were behind it as well, hoping to create a new regional order that would protect Israel.

I'm sure there were some who were dumb enough to believe that Iraq had some ties to the 9/11 attacks, despite all the evidence to the contrary, and wanted revenge.

And I imagine that somewhere in the never-therapized mind of George W, he had hankering to do his daddy one better and actually grease that Saddam fellow. Yes, he wanted revenge for Saddam supposedly trying to kill his daddy (there was never any evidence to support the claim).

The Bush administration and their right-wing constituents' twisted interests are the reasons we went to war. As for the (ex post facto) stated reasons we went, I'll even go so far as saying that somewhere in the bowels of the State Department there were folks who honestly believed in democratization and humanitarian intervention. Although they weren't allowed in the meetings. And they probably spent a lot of time hiding under their desks from John Bolton.

Of course, the one thing nobody in their right mind believed for a second was that Iraq was an actual threat to the national security of the United States.

Note: this post borrowed heavily from a previous post on the Gadflyer.

Digg!

Joshua Holland is a staff writer at Alternet and a regular contributor to The Gadflyer.


Peace in Lebanon -- now!
The USA has a moral obligation to resolve the conflict raging in Lebanon and rest of the Middle East -- and it can.
Post by Rep. Dennis Kucinich. July 24, 2006.
President Bush sent me an internet
Democrat v. Democratic and the Iraq War
Post by Evan Derkacz. July 24, 2006.
A new kind of money
Today's money is based on the belief that it's worth something. Crazy, no? Why not back your dollar in sustainable energy produced in your hometown?
Post by Julian Darley. July 20, 2006.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
reasons
Posted by: particle on Mar 20, 2006 5:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm betting that pretty much covers it. The motives are always mixed. And I suspect that floating around there was probably some slick and inaccessible calculus for optimizing outcomes and defining strategies on the global chessboard that no doubt got massaged a bit to better marry with the neocon world view.

Mention for good measure those social intangibles that created the climate, if not the pressure, required for a colossal temper tantrum. Iraq provided a convenient target for bullying for all those disgruntled, puffed-up, but-heads itching to blow off steam for whatever reason.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

cobblepot
Posted by: cobblepot on Mar 21, 2006 6:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I may be turning into one of the "special people." but the explanations about petrodollars versus petroeuros has a lot of merit. If it is true that saddam began trading in euros in 2000, and the oil-for-food program dealt in euros, and THEN, two months after the invasion former oil contracts with china, france, russia, etc. were canceled by "coalition" provisional authority, AND switched the economy back to dollars, it seems dollar-hegemony is a major factor in the war. William h. clark writes about venezuela's change to euros and escalating tension with the u.s., and now iran's oil bourse is commencing and will deal in euros, and yikes! Look at the demonization of iran and ahmadinejad we are hearing every day. I confess, i may be drinking clark's kool-aid...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Labs
Posted by: chaoslegs on Mar 21, 2006 9:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
AEI and Chamber of Commerce could already look to Chile under Pinochet as their neoliberal lab. Although I do agree that since that lab is closed, they might want a new one with more direct control from the US.

Maybe it was really a lab to see if Rummy's flexible and mobile (and small) army could get the job done.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oil and now stop the euro
Posted by: TKO on Mar 21, 2006 9:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From Frontline "Saudi Time Bomb", aired 1 November 2001, James Baker on why we had troops in Saudi Arabia and sold them over $50 Billion dollars worth of arms and equipment between 1979 and 2001, “They buy from America because they want America present there to the extent we can be in the Kingdom because we are their security. Why are we their security? We are their security because we have a self interest in making sure those energy reserves of the Persian Gulf don't fall under the control of a country that is adverse to the United States, as I told you. I've worked for four administrations under three presidents and in every one of those, our policy was, we would go to war to protect the energy reserves of the Persian Gulf. That is a major and very significant national security interest that we have.” Quite a bit of emphasis was put on the last sentence. James Baker is the same Republicrud that argued for Shrub in front of the Supreme Court in the 2000 election debacle. I guess the Rethugs in power consider all the oil in the middle east our reserves. Rumsfeld will never resign. Cheney used to work for Rumsfeld in the past. They are joined at the hip. No one else would give give such blind obedience to breaking laws for this administration.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

oh yes, there is a cause, just inhale & smell it
Posted by: cold2touch on Mar 21, 2006 11:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
CREATIVE DESTRUCTION
The mantra of Neos, like Michael Ledeen, Bill Kristol and other Maoists who are to Washington what HIV is to immune system.
When Grover Norquist said he wants to shrink government (read: "checks and balances") to the size where he can drown it in a bathtub, he channeled the same thought. It is like putting serial rapists in charge of a women's shelter - they like the idea very much, thank you. And they will mutate with astonishing speed when it suits them, become Democrats as soon as GOP is thoroughly discredited, join Alternet as soon as Hillary and Lieberman bite the dust, and so on.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

waynels
Posted by: waynels on Mar 21, 2006 12:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My personal favorite for the Iraq War: Oil Security, a phrase I ran across---somewhere. For more on this check out Greg Palast website. Just Google it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There IS One Reason...One CRIMINAL Reason!
Posted by: afeldstein@mcn.net on Mar 21, 2006 4:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There IS one reason for the War in Iraq!

A war that has lasted three long, bloody, expensive, murdering years!

Yet even now...now that there has been substantial evidence that the President, the Vice President, and other high-ranking members of the Bush administration misled Congress and the American people regarding the decision to go to war with Iraq and misstated and manipulated intelligence information regarding the justification for said war...

...that there were no WMD's...no poison gas...no ties to Al Queda and to 9-11...

....the burning question ... that everybody, including Mr, Holland, seems to be deliberately avoiding... remains: Why?!

WHY?!

Why did the Bush Administration lie to us?!

Why did the Bush Administration invade Iraq?!

Here is WHY ! !

Back in 1997, a political action group was formed by Paul Wolfowitz, Dick Chaney, Donald Rumsfeld, Jeb Bush, John Bolton, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, et al ... with publicly stated plans to "Democratize" the Middle East ( Translation: to get rid of the Sheiks and the Dictators and "privatize" their oil fields, which the Sheiks and Dictators had "nationalized" in the '70's, throwing out "Big Oil" {The American Oil Companies} and their ownership of those fields, and forming OPEC ).

The political action group's goal was to change those Middle East regimes under the pretext of "Democratizing" their countries so that "Big Oil" could once again attain ownership of their oil fields and their oil.

The group was a "front" for America's "Big Oil"!

The group was called:

"Project For A New American Century"

Many of its original founders are currently high-placed influential members of the Bush Administration!

Go to:

http://newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm

...see who were its original founders...and read their "Statement of Principles"!

Then peruse their site...

And learn about their veiled plans to destroy OPEC for "Big Oil."

Unfortunately, Saddam Hussein had other plans:

( See "The Cheney Energy Task Force Papers" of March 5th, 2001... made public by the work of Judicial Watch...deliniating the "Suitors For Iraqi Oil" and their lucrative "Post-Gulf War Sanctions" contracts, signed with Saddam Hussein )!

Go to:

http://www.judicialwatch.org/iraqi-oil-maps.shtml


And learn WHY we invaded Iraq and WHY over 2400 American G.I.'s have been killed and over 17,000 have been maimed and wounded...not to mention over 100,000 Iraqi civilians killed, maimed and wounded...

Because those NeoilCons active in, influential in and controlling the Bush Administration had to STOP Saddam Hussein, once his Gulf War Sanctions were lifted, from developing his oil fields with the help of the French, the Germans, the Chinese and the Russians...while completely shunning the American "Big Oil" Companies that the NeoilCons were beholden to!

It was imperative that those NeoilCons keep Iraq's oil OFF the market for "Big Oil's" sake!

It was imperative to maintain "Big Oil's" ( and OPEC's ) artificial price structure and obscene profits without any competition from Saddam Hussein!

Destroying OPEC for "Big Oil" would have to wait for another day.

Pre-emptive war would solve the problem!

When, Dear God, is somebody going to wake up the American People and expose these murderers and their abominable crimes?!

And demand that they be PUNISHED?!

MAD-ly yours,
Al Feldstein
Retired Editor ; MAD Magazine (1956-1884)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

person
Posted by: justgreenleaf on Mar 23, 2006 11:02 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
After reading a number of the comments on this article, it seemed to me to be worthwhile to think on this--none of the principal architects or promoters of the war in Iraq will ever suffer in any fashion. Not personally or financially or emotionally, or however one might wish to qualify.
When you think about the death and destruction brought on by these people,with absolutely no remorse or concern, it's really quite horrifying.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]