IRAQ WAR - LOOKING GLASS NEWS | |
Iraq: A War For Israel |
|
by Mark Weber thetruthseeker Entered into the database on Monday, June 13th, 2005 @ 17:38:32 MST |
|
The United States Invasion of Iraq in March-April 2003, and the occupation of
the country since then, has cost more than fifteen hundred American lives and
many tens of billions of dollars, and has brought death to many thousands of Iraqis. Why did President Bush decide to go to war? In whose interests was it launched? In the months leading up to the attack, President Bush and other high-ranking
US officials repeatedly warned that the threat posed to the US and world by
the Baghdad regime was so grave and imminent that the United States had to act
quickly to bomb, invade and occupy Iraq. On September 28, 2002, for example, he said: "The danger to our country
is grave and it is growing. The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical
weapons, is rebuilding the facilities to make more and, according to the British
government, could launch a biological or chemical attack in as little as 45
minutes after the order is given... This regime is seeking a nuclear bomb, and
with fissile material could build one within a year." On March 6, 2003, President Bush declared: "Saddam Hussein and his weapons
are a direct threat to this country, to our people, and to all free people...
I believe Saddam Hussein is a threat to the American people. I believe he’s
a threat to the neighborhood in which he lives. And I’ve got good evidence
to believe that. He has weapons of mass destruction... The American people know
that Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction." These claims were untrue. As the world now knows, Iraq had no dangerous "weapons
of mass destruction," and posed no threat to the US. Moreover, alarmist
suggestions that the Baghdad regime was working with the al-Qaeda terror network
likewise proved to be without foundation. So if the official reasons given for the war were untrue, why did the United
States attack? Whatever the secondary reasons for the Iraq war, the crucial factor in President
Bush’s decision to attack was to help Israel. With support from Israel
and America’s Jewish-Zionist lobby, and prodded by Jewish "neo-conservatives"
holding high-level positions in his administration, President Bush — who
was already fervently committed to Israel — resolved to invade and subdue
one of Israel’s chief regional enemies. This is so widely understood in Washington that US Senator Ernest Hollings
was moved in May 2004 to acknowledge that the US invaded Iraq "to secure
Israel," and "everybody" knows it. He also identified three of
the influential pro-Israel Jews in Washington who played an important role in
prodding the US into war: Richard Perle, chair of the Pentagon’s Defense
Policy Board; Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Defense Secretary; and Charles Krauthammer,
columnist and author. [1] Hollings referred to the cowardly reluctance of his C ongressional colleagues to acknowledge this truth openly, saying that "nobody
is willing to stand up and say what is going on." Due to "the pressures
we get politically," he added, members of Congress uncritically support
Israel and its policies. Some months before the invasion, retired four-star US Army General and former
NATO Supreme Allied Commander Wesley Clark said in an interview: "Those who favor this attack [by the US against Iraq] now will tell you
candidly, and privately, that it is probably true that Saddam Hussein is no
threat to the United States. But they are afraid at some point he might decide
if he had a nuclear weapon to use it against Israel." [2] Fervently Pro-Israel President Bush’s fervent support for Israel and its hardline premier
is well known. He reaffirmed it, for example, in June 2002 in a major speech
on the Middle East. In the view of "leading Israeli commentators,"
the London Times reported, the address was "so pro-Israel that it might
have been written by Ariel Sharon." [3] Condoleeza Rice, Bush's National Security Advisor, echoed the President’s
outlook in a May 2003 interview, saying that the "security of Israel is
the key to security of the world." [4] In an address to pro-Israel activists at the 2004 convention of the American
Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), Bush said: "The United States
is strongly committed, and I am strongly committed, to the security of Israel
as a vibrant Jewish state." He also told the gathering: "By defending
the freedom and prosperity and security of Israel, you’re also serving
the cause of America." [5] Long Range Plans Jewish-Zionist plans for war against Iraq had been in place for years. In mid-1996, a policy paper prepared for then-Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu outlined a grand strategy for Israel in the Middle East. Entitled
"A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm," it was written
under the auspices of an Israeli think tank, the Institute for Advanced Strategic
and Political Studies. Specifically, it called for an "effort [that] can
focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq, an important Israeli strategic
objective in its own right..." [6] The authors of "A Clean Break" included Richard Perle, Douglas Feith,
and David Wurmser, three influential Jews who later held high-level positions
in the Bush administration, 2001-2004: Perle as chair of the Defense Policy
Board, Feith as Undersecretary of Defense, and Wurmser as special assistant
to the Undersecretary of State for Arms Control. The role played by Bush administration officials who are associated with two
major pro-Zionist "neoconservative" research centers has come under
scrutiny from The Nation, the influential public affairs weekly. [7] The author, Jason Vest, examined the close links between the Jewish Institute
for National Security Affairs (JINSA) and the Center for Security Policy (CSP),
detailing the ties between these groups and various politicians, arms merchants,
military men, wealthy pro-Israel American Jews, and Republican presidential
administrations. JINSA and CSP members, notes Vest, "have ascended to powerful government
posts, where... they’ve managed to weave a number of issues — support
for national missile defense, opposition to arms control treaties, championing
of wasteful weapons systems, arms aid to Turkey and American unilateralism in
general — into a hard line, with support for the Israeli right at its
core... On no issue is the JINSA/CSP hard line more evident than in its relentless
campaign for war — not just with Iraq, but 'total war,' as Michael Ledeen,
one of the most influential JINSAns in Washington, put it... For this crew,
'regime change' by any means necessary in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and
the Palestinian Authority is an urgent imperative." Samuel Francis, author, editor and columnist, has also looked into the "neo-conservative"
role in fomenting war. [8] "My own answer," he wrote, "is that the lie [that a massively-armed
Iraq posed a grave and imminent threat to the US] was fabricated by neo-conservatives
in the administration whose first loyalty is to Israel and its interests and
who wanted the United States to smash Iraq because it was the biggest potential
threat to Israel in the region. They are known to have been pushing for war
with Iraq since at least 1996, but they could not make an effective case for
it until after Sept. 11, 2001... "What has been happening inside the Bush administration is no less a nest
of treason than the Soviet spy rings of the New Deal era, and if political reality
doesn’t demand its exposure, simple loyalty to the United States does."
In the aftermath of the 2001 Nine-Eleven terror attacks, ardently pro-Zionist
"neo-conservatives" in the Bush administration — who for years
had sought a Middle East war to bolster Israel’s security in the region
— exploited the tragedy to press their agenda. In this they were backed
by the Israeli government, which also pressured the White House to strike Iraq.
The Jerusalem correspondent for the Guardian, the respected British daily,
reported in August 2002: "Israel signalled its decision yesterday to put
public pressure on President George Bush to go ahead with a military attack
on Iraq, even though it believes Saddam Hussein may well retaliate by striking
Israel." [9] Israel's spy agencies were a "full partner" with the US and Britain
in producing greatly exaggerated prewar assessments of Iraq’s ability
to wage war, a former senior Israeli military intelligence official has acknowledged.
Shlomo Bron, a brigadier general in the Israel army reserves, and a senior researcher
at a major Israeli think tank, said that intelligence provided by Israel played
a significant role in supporting the US and British case for making war. Israeli
intelligence agencies, he said, "badly overestimated the Iraqi threat to
Israel and reinforced the American and British belief that the weapons [of mass
destruction] existed." [11] For some Jewish leaders, the Iraq war is part of a long-range effort to install
Israel-friendly regimes across the Middle East. Norman Podhoretz, a prominent
Jewish writer and an ardent supporter of Israel, has been for years editor of
Commentary, the influential Zionist monthly. In the Sept. 2002 issue he wrote:
"The regimes that richly deserve to be overthrown and replaced are not
confined to the three singled-out members of the axis of evil [Iraq, Iran, North
Korea]. At a minimum, the axis should extend to Syria and Lebanon and Libya,
as well as 'friends' of America like the Saudi royal family and Egypt’s
Hosni Mubarak, along with the Palestinian Authority, whether headed by Arafat
or one of his henchmen." Patrick J. Buchanan, the well-known writer and commentator, and former White
House Communications director, has been blunt in identifying those who pushed
for war: [12] "We charge that a cabal of polemicists and public officials seek to ensnare
our country in a series of wars that are not in America’s interests. We
charge them with colluding with Israel to ignite those wars and destroy the
Oslo Accords. We charge them with deliberately damaging US relations with every
state in the Arab world that defies Israel or supports the Palestinian people’s
right to a homeland of their own. We charge that they have alienated friends
and allies all over the Islamic and Western world through their arrogance, hubris,
and bellicosity... "Cui Bono? For whose benefit these endless wars in a region that holds
nothing vital to America save oil, which the Arabs must sell us to survive?
Who would benefit from a war of civilizations between the West and Islam? "Answer: one nation, one leader, one party. Israel, Sharon, Likud."
Uri Avnery — an award-winning Israeli journalist and author, and a three-time
member of Israel’s parliament — sees the Iraq war as an expression
of immense Jewish influence and power. In an essay written some weeks after
the US invasion, he wrote: [13] "Who are the winners? They are the so-called neo-cons, or neo-conservatives.
A compact group, almost all of whose members are Jewish. They hold the key positions
in the Bush administration, as well as in the think-tanks that play an important
role in formulating American policy and the ed-op pages of the influential newspapers...
The immense influence of this largely Jewish group stems from its close alliance
with the extreme right-wing Christian fundamentalists, who nowadays control
Bush's Republican party. ...Seemingly, all this is good for Israel. America
controls the world, we control America. Never before have Jews exerted such
an immense influence on the center of world power." In Britain, a veteran member of Britain’s House of Commons bluntly declared
in May 2003 that Jews had taken control of America’s foreign policy, and
had succeeded in pushing the US into war. "A Jewish cabal have taken over
the government in the United States and formed an unholy alliance with fundamentalist
Christians," said Tam Dalyell, a Labour party deputy and the longest-serving
House member. "There is far too much Jewish influence in the United States,"
he added. [14] Summary For many years now, American presidents of both parties have been staunchly
committed to Israel and its security. This entrenched policy is an expression
of the Jewish-Zionist grip on America’s political and cultural life. It
was fervent support for Israel — shared by President Bush, high-ranking
administration officials and nearly the entire US Congress — that proved
crucial in the decision to invade and subdue one of Israel’s greatest
regional enemies. While the unprovoked US invasion of Iraq may have helped Israel, just as those
who wanted and planned for the war had hoped, it has been a calamity for America
and the world. It has cost tens of thousands of lives and many tens of billions
of dollars. Around the world, it has generated unmatched distrust and hostility
toward the US. In Arab and Muslim countries, it has fueled intense hatred of
the United States, and has brought many new recruits to the ranks of anti-American
terrorists. Americans have already paid a high price for their nation’s commitment
to Israel. We will pay an ever higher price — not just in dollars or international
prestige, but in the lives of young men squandered for the interests of a foreign
state — until the Jewish-Zionist hold on US political life is finally
broken. Notes |