Bush planned Iraq 'regime change' before becoming President

Thrillhouse

Back from the dead
Joined
Jun 22, 2002
Posts
1,752
Bush planned Iraq 'regime change' before becoming President




By Neil Mackay



A SECRET blueprint for US global domination reveals that President Bush and his cabinet were planning a premeditated attack on Iraq to secure 'regime change' even before he took power in January 2001.
The blueprint, uncovered by the Sunday Herald, for the creation of a 'global Pax Americana' was drawn up for Dick Cheney (now vice- president), Donald Rumsfeld (defence secretary), Paul Wolfowitz (Rumsfeld's deputy), George W Bush's younger brother Jeb and Lewis Libby (Cheney's chief of staff). The document, entitled Rebuilding America's Defences: Strategies, Forces And Resources For A New Century, was written in September 2000 by the neo-conservative think-tank Project for the New American Century (PNAC).

The plan shows Bush's cabinet intended to take military control of the Gulf region whether or not Saddam Hussein was in power. It says: 'The United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.'

The PNAC document supports a 'blueprint for maintaining global US pre-eminence, precluding the rise of a great power rival, and shaping the international security order in line with American principles and interests'.

This 'American grand strategy' must be advanced for 'as far into the future as possible', the report says. It also calls for the US to 'fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theatre wars' as a 'core mission'.

The report describes American armed forces abroad as 'the cavalry on the new American frontier'. The PNAC blueprint supports an earlier document written by Wolfowitz and Libby that said the US must 'discourage advanced industrial nations from challenging our leadership or even aspiring to a larger regional or global role'.

The PNAC report also:

l refers to key allies such as the UK as 'the most effective and efficient means of exercising American global leadership';

l describes peace-keeping missions as 'demanding American political leadership rather than that of the United Nations';

l reveals worries in the administration that Europe could rival the USA;

l says 'even should Saddam pass from the scene' bases in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait will remain permanently -- despite domestic opposition in the Gulf regimes to the stationing of US troops -- as 'Iran may well prove as large a threat to US interests as Iraq has';

l spotlights China for 'regime change' saying 'it is time to increase the presence of American forces in southeast Asia'. This, it says, may lead to 'American and allied power providing the spur to the process of democratisation in China';

l calls for the creation of 'US Space Forces', to dominate space, and the total control of cyberspace to prevent 'enemies' using the internet against the US;

l hints that, despite threatening war against Iraq for developing weapons of mass destruction, the US may consider developing biological weapons -- which the nation has banned -- in decades to come. It says: 'New methods of attack -- electronic, 'non-lethal', biological -- will be more widely available ... combat likely will take place in new dimensions, in space, cyberspace, and perhaps the world of microbes ... advanced forms of biological warfare that can 'target' specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool';

l and pinpoints North Korea, Libya, Syria and Iran as dangerous regimes and says their existence justifies the creation of a 'world-wide command-and-control system'.

Tam Dalyell, the Labour MP, father of the House of Commons and one of the leading rebel voices against war with Iraq, said: 'This is garbage from right-wing think-tanks stuffed with chicken-hawks -- men who have never seen the horror of war but are in love with the idea of war. Men like Cheney, who were draft-dodgers in the Vietnam war.

'This is a blueprint for US world domination -- a new world order of their making. These are the thought processes of fantasist Americans who want to control the world. I am appalled that a British Labour Prime Minister should have got into bed with a crew which has this moral standing.'

http://www.sundayherald.com/27735

Why didn't the US media pick up on this?
 
Not quite so black and white

http://www.bushnews.com/needtoknow.htm

What's Wrong And What's Right With Sunday's Anti-Bush "Cause Celebre"

On Sunday morning the Internet was buzzing with the latest report of Bush's hawkish proclivities. According to Neil Mackay of Sunday Herald, a newspaper in Glascow, Scotland, "Bush planned Iraq 'regime change' before becoming President." That's what the headline read, and Mackay apperared to imply that he based this belief upon what he read in a think tank study published in September, 2000, "Rebuilding America's Defences: Strategies, Forces And Resources For A New Century," by the Project for the New American Century (PNAC). One other source is mentioned in the story, an unnamed document written by Lewis Libby and Paul Wolfowitz prior to the PNAC study, which may have been the extent of their participation in the study. (See below.) The piece concludes with a reaction quote by a British MP.

Since no url was provided by Mackay, I Googled the web address for the PNAC, quickly visited the site, and skimmed the pdf file of the study. The file is 78 pages long, and it became clear that the site would have to be revisted when I had more time to consider Mackay's contentions more fully. Paul Wolfowitz and Lewis Libby were identified as having participated in the PNAC study, as did Bill Kristol, who was not mentioned in the Mackay story. I found no evidence that the study was "a secret blueprint for US global domination," having been able to view it almost immediately upon visiting the PNAC site, nor did my brief viewing of the pdf file reveal "that President Bush and his cabinet were planning a premeditated attack on Iraq to secure 'regime change' even before he took power in January 2001." Unfortunately, when I had the time to return to the PNAC site later in the day, it could not "be displayed"; same with the the pdf file. Perhaps now it really is secret. (See update at end.)

Fortunately, Norm Dixon's Counterpunch story on the exploitation of 9/11, posted last Wednesday, provides us with a history of PNAC and the study in question, the latter having roots back to 1992 and Cheney's activities in the first Bush administration. Dixon doesn't mention "that President Bush and his cabinet were planning a premeditated attack on Iraq to secure 'regime change' even before he took power in January 2001." Personally, when the two pieces were read side-by-side, I found Dixon's report of the PNAC study to be more instructive and more measured. (Mackay reports that the "secret blueprint for US global domination... [was] uncovered by the Sunday Herald." Uncovered for the second time in 5 days?) The relevant section of the Dixon piece follows here. --Politex, Sept. 15, 2002

Update. A reader sent me a link to the first half of the study from a Google cache source outside the PNAC site. Click here

In 1997, the PNAC was established to promote ``American global leadership''. Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld (now US defence secretary), Paul Wolfowitz (now deputy defence secretary) and Jeb Bush (Bush junior's brother) were signatories to the PNAC's founding ``statement of principle''. It stated bluntly: ``[Conservatives] seem to have forgotten the essential elements of the Reagan administration's success: a military that is strong and ready to meet both present and future challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and purposely promotes American principles abroad; and a national leadership that accepts the United States' global responsibilities .

``America has a role in maintaining peace and security in Europe, Asia and the Middle East. If we shirk our responsibilities, we invite challenges to our fundamental interests. The history of the 20th century should have taught us that it is important to shape circumstances before crises emerge, and to meet threats before they become dire. The history of this century should have taught us to embrace the cause of American leadership.''.

The PNAC argued that the US must ``increase defense spending significantly'' and ``modernize our armed forces if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today'' ; ``strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values''; ``promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad''; and ``accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles''..

``Such a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity may not be fashionable today'', the PNAC conceded. ``But it is necessary if the United States is to build on the successes of this past century and to ensure our security and our greatness in the next.''.

In September 2000, the PNAC fleshed out its imperial vision with the release of a report, Rebuilding America's defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century. The project's participants included Wolfowitz, Lewis Libby (now Cheney's chief of staff) and Weekly Standard editor William Kristol..

The report's introduction noted that the US ``is the world's only superpower, combining preeminent military power, global technological leadership and the world's largest economy At present the US faces no global rival. America's grand strategy should aim to preserve and extend this advantageous position as far into the future as possible''. To preserve this ``desirable strategic situation'', the report stated, the US ``requires a globally preeminent military capability both today and in the future''..

The report's authors admitted that they had built upon the 1992 draft of the Pentagon's Defense Planning Guidance (DPG), which was prepared for Cheney, who was then US defence secretary in the Bush senior administration, Wolfowitz and Libby..

This document stated bluntly that the US must continue to ``discourage ... advanced industrial nations from challenging our leadership or ... even aspiring to a larger regional or global role ... [To achieve this, the US] must retain the preeminent responsibility for addressing ... those wrongs which threaten not only our interests, but those of our allies or friends, or which seriously unsettle international relations.''.

This was an admission that the massive build-up of US military might in Europe, Asia and the Middle East after 1945 was not simply directed at containing ``Soviet expansionism'', crushing Third World revolutions and controlling natural resources such as Middle Eastern oil -- as vital to US interests as they were. It was also aimed at enmeshing its potential capitalist rivals -- Britain, France, Germany and Japan -- within US-dominated military alliances designed to prevent them developing independent armed forces..

The PNAC report endorsed the DPG's ``blueprint for maintaining US preeminence, precluding the rise of a great power rival, and shaping the international security order in line with American principles and interests... The basic tenets of the DPG, in our judgment, remain sound.''.

The PNAC report recommended that the US turn around the 1990s ``decade of defence neglect'' and boost war spending to a minimum of 3.5-3.8% of GDP (up from around 3%) by adding US$15 billion to US$20 billion annually; increase the numbers of active-duty military personnel from 1.4 million to 1.6 million; and ``reposition US forces ... by shifting permanently based forces to southeast Europe [the Balkans] and Southeast Asia [preferably the Philippines and/or Australia], and by changing naval deployment patterns to reflect growing US strategic concerns in East Asia [meaning the `containment' of China and the `defence' of Taiwan]''..

The report also urged Washington to develop the capability to ``fight and win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars'' and at the same time ``perform the `constabulary' duties associated with shaping the security environment in critical regions''; maintain ``nuclear strategic superiority'' by developing smaller ``bunker-buster'' nuclear weapons and resuming nuclear testing; develop the ``star wars'' global ``missile defence system''; and ``control the new `international commons' of space and `cyberspace' and pave the way for the creation of a new military service -- US Space Forces -- with the mission of space control[!]''..

As all the above indicates, the Cheney-Rumsfeld-Wolfowitz cabal have had a long-standing program for the expansion of US hegemony. What it lacked was the ``trigger'' to implement it or the existence of a serious enough ``threat'' that would convince the US people to abandon their desire for a ``peace dividend'' and their opposition to US war casualties abroad..

Which is why the 9/11 attacks were a godsend for the Bush gang.
 
Thrillhouse said:
Why didn't the US media pick up on this?
Probably because it's written like something in the National Enquirer:

"A SECRET blueprint for US global domination"

"The blueprint, uncovered by the Sunday Herald, for the creation of a 'global Pax Americana' was drawn up for Dick Cheney (now vice- president), Donald Rumsfeld (defence secretary), Paul Wolfowitz (Rumsfeld's deputy), George W Bush's younger brother Jeb and Lewis Libby (Cheney's chief of staff)."

Blah blah blah. Think tanks and the Pentagon spend all day thinking up contingency plans for alternate scenarios for all sorts of shit that feeble minds like this dorko can't even conceive of because they're so immersed in anti-U.S. hysteria.

Obviously we're following this to the letter. That regime change in China is going swimmingly.

What an ass.

TB4p
 
Back
Top