|
January 10, 2007 | The Senator from the Commonwealth has again spoken elouquently. Even though many folk cannot get past his Mary Jo, his privaledged treatment or his association with what has become known as a Liberal Dynasty, Theo has stepped forward when needed. He has stepped into the fire - and has already begun to feel the guile from those who wish to perpetuate the debacle we call Iraq. He is an easy mark, yet he has more courage than his fence sitting peers who are motivated by myriad fears that stem from their ability to keep various lobbys happy and hold office - at the expense of their constituents. You should take the time to watch Theo's speech on Iraq in front of the National Press Club yesterday. For those who cannot view the video, a transcript of the speech is also available. The saddest parts of Kennedy's statements are those whereby he appears to wish to absolve his congressional peers from blame in the Iraq mess. He seeks to view the authorization for war in Iraq, that most Democrats voted for, as obsolete. While it is a political necessity to try and use existing Congressmen to remove war powers from Bush - there should be no escaping blame - escaping culpability - for those Congressmen who voted to attack Iraq. There should be no eleventh hour caveat for an earlier mistake. It opens the door for absolution on a technicality without having to accept blame. It is an opportunity to accept a cowardly path and unbecoming an American. Any competent representative should have known the ideals of Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Powell, Perle and various other GOP retreads who were already in place when Congress made the historic mistake. The failures of those Congressmen should not go unpunished. Anyone who was paying attention knew about the Defense Planning Guidance that Wolfowitz published over a decade before the vote to attack Iraq. Anyone who was paying attention to the 2000 Bush campaign should have known that an elected Bush administration would use any means to get our forces into Iraq. [The following is part of an original article published in October 2005 entitled "Strategy in Iraq".]
Take the time here to kick start your Google window and try and find a copy of the entire Wolfowitz 1992 draft. It's a daunting task, with glimpses of promise from PDF files stored in various educational archives, and you'll probably see the site references in the links that litter this diatribe as well but you may not find a copy of the original 1992 DPG draft. You may easily, however, find references of content.
What is the intrigue with this draft you ask? Well, it is a blueprint for our more current foreign policy and primary evidence for the claim that the Bush administration intended to impose U.S. intervention in Iraq all along. The 1992 draft and subsequent revisions were probably the reason the press continually asked the Bush campaign in 2000 if there were plans to invade Iraq - a question that the Bush folks denied. Yet, all the actor parts and counterparts that evolved from the ideology of the original and follow-up DPG strategies ended up well placed in the current administration and more particularly within the Department of Defense (Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, and company). The VP, Cheney, (and his underling Scooter Libby) were on board from the start along with Colin Powell before the Bush41 administration handed the keys for the missile silos to Clinton, et al. There was a bit of confusion about defense planning, and more importantly defense funding, after the U.S.S.R. fell from the cast of enemy number one. Cheney is said to have mistrusted the Soviet collapse, yet eventually began to understand the Wolfowitz plan after it was cleaned and shaped further for public consumption.
What is all this bugaboo? Well, it is a clear cut case of Americans not paying attention. The news is old news, yet its pertinence is shockingly important today. The original DPG draft was leaked to the press in 1992. The NY Times posted this story and the Washington Post posted this story. The first mention of a draft revision was written by the NY Times in May of 1992. If you'd like a good "all-in-one" check this PBS site for a quick dose (is this one reason why the rebulicans are seeking to control PBS?). After you get a good overall feel for the "Wolfowitz Plan" and maybe do a bit of fact checking on your own - a rehashing of the whole monkey show was written in a 2002 article in Harper's Magazine entitled "Dick Cheney's Song of America".
It feels good to air the DPG out again at this juncture. It makes the current situation a bit easier to see. We are demonstrating to the world we can function on two fronts. We have no exit strategy as there is no exit strategy anticipated. Why would we be constructing nine permanent bases in Iraq if we intended to bug out? It turns out, it is about American hegemony after all - and of course the oil. Americans have unwittingly set their country on a course chasing the ideal of unlimited and unquestioned power without ever considering such an ideal is fool's gold. Take the time yourself to thread through the myriad crap that has been fed to the masses over the duration. Take a peek at this yarn that could admittedly be better footnoted. Compare what YOU find with the crap you are being fed, such as the staged and frightfully revolting crap spewed continuously by Bush.
It would appear that, even though the average congressional idiot could be fooled by cooked intelligence, the justifications for invading Iraq were as transparent as air to anyone politically astute.
1.10.07
|