Facile

Sunday, May 17, 2015

Bush Should Face Consequences His Illegal Invasion of Iraq.

Do we truly know why 9/11 happened? I mean we know who did it and even who financed the terrorist attack, but what we forget to discuss is why these people were willing to die for a lost cause? You see, Bin Laden had two motives, one was to punish America for aggression in the Middle East and American's support for Israel. Another key point was to lure George Bush into the Middle East by sending soldiers to fight. He believed this was a holy war of sorts. Bin Laden should have been the one to land on the aircraft carrier with a 'Mission Accomplished' banner waving behind him because the terrorist's plan went according to the playbook.

We sent hundreds of thousands of troops to Afghanistan, for what - what was their mission? No one seems to know because 13 years later, we're still in Afghanistan.
Instead of focus on victory in one country, Bush decided he'll lie to the American people about a non-existent threat Saddam Hussein posed.

Bush did an excellent job of spreading misinformation. 
*The Bush administration lied about the threat Saddam posed.
*They manipulated data and facts to suggest Saddam did, in fact, possess weapons of mass destruction.
*Bush knew the entire time, Saddam did not have WMDs.
 He led the American people to believe not only did Saddam have Weapons of Mass Destruction, but that he sponsored terrorism and paid suicide bombers' families. Both of which were false. *Furthermore, Bush claimed Saddam Hussein was well connected to Bin Laden, in fact, Bush revealed Iraqi forces were training the terrorist organization with bomb making, and poisonous gasses, like anthrax, etc.
This claim also turned out to be false.

*  In addition, Cheney -- and company gave false information to the media to suggest there was bulletproof evidence Saddam, in fact, had weapons of mass destruction, even revealing alleged sites these chemical weapons were, however, this too was false.

* Also, the claim Saddam was  a hardline Islamist was simply false. Saddam's regime Baathist Party was secular, he didn't trust Bin Laden because of his religious fanaticism. Saddam didn't want to be associated with religious zealots; therefore, the attempt of tying Saddam to 9/11 was false, he had nothing to do with the terror attacks on the fateful Tuesday morning.

*Saddam did NOT have the capability or the desire to implement a nuke program. He didn't want Iran to know this, however. The ruthless dictator feared Iran and the fact they could invade Iraq and create a Caliphate. Boy, what a premonition even the evil Hussein had, he realized what would happen once you caused instability in the region.

Take into consideration the following points:
* Dick Cheney told a media outlet that American troops would, 'in fact, be greeted as liberators.' As we know, this too was a lie. A lie that was foreseeable, yet ignored all the same.

* We were told that we didn't want the final proof to be a mushroom cloud  in America. Of course, they were implying Iraqi's for some reason would come and set off a nuke storm. You see, at the time, the Iraqi's didn't have anything against America at least not in the personal sense. Sure collectively the Iraqi's and everyone in the Middle East doesn't see American aggression in the Middle East as helpful to their plight. Especially when we leave the country in ruins after raping their economy, oil and kill innocent people in the process.

And then, we started kidnapping people and sending them to an illegal facility in Gitmo Bay, Cuba, and terrible - terrible things happened at that hell hole.
Here are a few abuses reported.

* Sodomy
*Waterboarding
* Sleep deprivation
* Stress positions for hours on end.
*Senses deprivation.
*Mock executions
*Threats to them and raping their family.
*Humiliation.
*Attacked by Dogs.
*Chained in cold conditions (One man died).
*Anal feeding.
*Forced feeding.
*Physically assaulted
*Blaring the music the inmates despise.
Starting problems in the Iraq area weren't going to work out regardless, at least not in the United States.

Although this fact remains obvious, people are still defending the illegal 2003 invasion of Iraq, which at the time, was a sovereign nation. Sure Saddam was a bad guy, but the fact of the matter is he protected Christians and other ethnic minorities. No, not because he cared about Christians, but he didn't want to have conflict in his country, unless, of course, he was the perpetrator of violence.

*There were no terrorists in Iraq before the illegal invasion, which was denounced by the United Nations as an acted of aggression. Because the only two times you may enter a military conflict is if the United Nations gives the okay, or if you've been attacked, not indirectly but directly attacked. Otherwise, you engaged in a military conflict at odds with the actions of the Bush administration.

Be that as it may, Bush violated International Law with blatant disregard for the International Community as a whole. In fact, Bush said he didn't care what the U.N. lawyers said he was going to kick some ass.
He said nothing about liberating the people of Iraq until his lies were exposed. We certainly didn't liberate them because they're still not free.

The New 21st. Century project was about revamping the Middle East and  creating Western style government throughout the Middle East. Either  Bush didn't understand the culture in Iraq or just didn't care. The Iraqi  people are mostly Muslims; that's their religion. They don't care too much  for Western democracy because it, in no way, fits into their religious  lifestyle. However, most want a moderate government; one in which the  enemies are not the people, and the punishment fit the crime. Also, that  when and where appropriate mercy, be granted.

Instead of liberating the people of Iraq, we oppressed the people to a  certain degree, in part because the training regarding culture, ethnic  origins religious traditions of the people they were to occupy.  Conservatives get on Obama for not using the words 'Islamist terrorist' but  the truth is that term is all we know about people in the Middle East.
We had a chance to make true peace with the Iraqis. Instead, we disbanded the Iraqi military leaving hundreds of thousands without employment, pension, and paychecks. As you can imagine, the Iraqi people were outraged. Not too long after that brilliant idea to send Iraqi soldiers home was the start of the insurgency, or the Iraqis are taking up arms against American and coalition forces, creating chaos  beyond comparison. U.S. soldiers were dying left and right, and for what? For Bush's pride and 'New 21st Century,' that again is an attempt to revamp the Middle East into a Western-style democracy, but as stated before, they didn't want that democracy.

Which leads me to this point: George Bush, when he unleashed the gates of hell on the Iraqis, created something far worse than Saddam ruling his people, but what arose from the ashes of 'shock and awe'? ISIS. One of the most ruthless terrorist organizations in history. And, I might add, one of the richest terrorist organizations doing business on the black market with their oil and funneling money from Iran. I dare not forget to mention Saudi Arabia's role in financing terrorist organization. Or, Iran's role in funding terrorist. Now the Middle East is a hotbed of terrorism, good going George Bush. George Bush should pay for the havoc he's forced on the Iraqi people.

Source
1). Paul Rosenberg. (10 April 2015). Listen, it's still their f**king fault: Bush, Cheney, neo-con drivel, and the truth about Iraq and ISIS. Salon. http://www.salon.com/2015/04/09/listen_its_still_their_fking_fault_bush_cheney_neo_con_drivel_and_the_truth_about_iraq_and_isis/

No comments:

Post a Comment