spacer

Three Way News

Your Source. For everything. Really.

Contributors

Current Poll

Best comic strip?

  • Bloom County
  • Boondocks
  • Calvin and Hobbes
  • Dilbert
  • Doonesbury
  • Far Side
  • Foxtrot
  • Get Fuzzy
  • Life in Hell
  • Peanuts
  • Pearls Before Swine
  • Pogo
  • Zippy the Pinhead
  
Free polls from Pollhost.com

Recurring features

Hammer's Favorites

Jambo's Favories

Monday, May 02, 2005

Worse than I really believed

Posted by: Hammer / 8:05 PM

I saw this over at BobHarris.com. Seems awfully important to me. It also seems literally incredible. It's hard to believe that such a memo actually exists, even though it reflects my perception of just how craven the Bush administration is:
This record is extremely sensitive. No further copies should be made. It should be shown only to those with a genuine need to know its contents....

C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action....

The two broad US options were:

(a) Generated Start. A slow build-up of 250,000 US troops, a short (72 hour) air campaign, then a move up to Baghdad from the south. Lead time of 90 days (30 days preparation plus 60 days deployment to Kuwait).

(b) Running Start. Use forces already in theatre (3 x 6,000), continuous air campaign, initiated by an Iraqi casus belli. Total lead time of 60 days with the air campaign beginning even earlier. A hazardous option....

The Defence Secretary said that the US had already begun "spikes of activity" to put pressure on the regime. No decisions had been taken, but he thought the most likely timing in US minds for military action to begin was January, with the timeline beginning 30 days before the US Congressional elections....

The Attorney-General said that the desire for regime change was not a legal base for military action. There were three possible legal bases: self-defence, humanitarian intervention, or UNSC authorisation. The first and second could not be the base in this case. Relying on UNSCR 1205 of three years ago would be difficult. The situation might of course change.

This memo purportedly reflects British thinking on the invasion of Iraq as of July, 2002. Note that the Brits see the Bush administration as having made up its mind to invade with facts to be arranged around the policy. Note that there's no apparent post-war planning, and that the original force estimate is 250,000 US troops -- possibly enough to secure Iraq, but too expensive for this administration. Note that the Brits see the invasion as illegal without UNSC authorization.

Most significantly, note that the time line is pegged to begin 30 days before the November elections.

If true -- and I'm not at all convinced that this memo is an accurate reflection of the British or American position on Iraq in July, 2002 -- it's almost too awful to behold. The conscious preparation for a war conceived in fraud timed to be politically advantageous. That's the kind of indictment I say about this administration all the time, but never really wanted to believe.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home

Blogroll

Special Feeds

Fun with Google

Search Tools

Technorati

Google

3WN WWW

Prior posts

  • Saint Olaf
  • Ann Coulter at Saint Olaf
  • Legislation in search of a problem
  • Victims are never accountable for their actions
  • Medal of Freedom
  • Open Source Friday: Spotlight on the Tiger
  • Could be worse
  • News for the cable impaired
  • Hard-hitting criticism
  • Archives

    • Gone for now

    This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours? Site Meter Get Firefox!