Revisiting how and why on anniversary of the Iraq War

Just about twenty years ago (March 20, 2003) the United States and its coalition partners invaded Iraq and began one of America’s worst wars in terms of furthering the goal of making the world a safer place.  Since then, our natural tendency to forget, aided by the wish of some people who want us not to remember the reality of a war that lasted too long and was quite disastrous, have numbed us to how and why it began.

A refresher is in order.

George W. Bush, in his state-of-the-union speech in 2002, his first after the awful events of September 11, 2001, stated, “Terrorists who once occupied Afghanistan now occupy cells at Guantanamo Bay.  And terrorist leaders who urged followers to sacrifice their lives are running for their own.”  He then set new goals, to counter the activities of the “axis of evil,” North Korea, Iraq, and Iran — none of which countries had furnished any of the terrorists who had bombed America.  Claiming that any of the three could “provide arms to terrorists, giving them the means to match their hatred,” specifically “weapons of mass destruction,” he left no doubt as to America’s next target: Iraq.

By then, invasion plans were being pushed by Vice-President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and the neo-conservatives who had taken over the direction and execution of American military and foreign policy.   For at least a decade they had been preparing such an invasion on strategic grounds, as detailed in my 2009 book, “The Forty Years War: The Rise and Fall of the Neocons.”  And George W. Bush wanted to finish the job left undone by his father, George H. W. Bush – to topple Saddam Hussein.

In 2002-2003, when cooler heads such as General Eric Shinseki, the army’s chief of staff, and Thomas White, secretary of the army, objected to the proposed invasion, Shinseki was forced to retire early and White to resign.  Others who should have known better, such as Secretary of State Colin Powell, a former general, mounted few objections.

Many rationales were put forth for the war: that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction; that Al Qaeda was operating there in great force; that we would be spreading democracy by means of our invasion; and that Iraq was no longer necessary to the U.S. as a counterweight to the more dangerous Iran.   In subsequent years all would be shown to have been false.  And the U.S. admitted they were false before the invasion.  In July 2002, the head of British Intelligence Service MI6 was told by his American counterparts during meetings in Washington, as recorded in the latterly-famous Downing Street Memo of July 23, 2002: that “Bush wanted to remove Saddam Hussein through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD (weapons of mass destruction). But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.”

On Aug. 15, 2002, President H. W. Bush’s former chief military advisor, Brent Scowcroft, published an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal entitled, “Don’t Attack Saddam.”  Scowcroft cited a “virtual consensus in the world” against such an invasion, on the grounds that it “would seriously jeopardize, if not destroy, the global counter-terrorist campaign we have undertaken” in the wake of 9/11.

Internally, an August CIA memo to the president and other top officials upheld its title, “The Perfect Storm: Planning for the Negative Consequences of Invading Iraq” by naming those bad consequences: anarchy in Iraq, a surge in terrorism around the world, deepening Islamic antipathy to the U.S., Al Qaeda exploiting the circumstances to find new safe havens, declining European confidence in U.S. leadership, a Taliban resurgence in Afghanistan, and chaos in Pakistan.   Almost all of these would eventually come to pass.  The memo was ignored.

In November of 2002, in the first national election since 9/11, Republicans gained control of the House and the Senate for the first time under a Republican president since Dwight Eisenhower in the 1950s. That effectively sealed the push for invasion, enabling the pro-war clique in the White House to override any Congressional objections to beginning a pre-emptive war without a declaration of war from Congress.

 

Salisbury resident Tom Shachtman has written more than two dozen books and many television documentaries.  His website is www.tomshachtman.com

Latest News

'Gather' at Troutbeck

Romane Recalde speaking about her new business at Gather.

Natalia Zukerman

Hosted by Jason Klein and Sascha Lewis, an ongoing series called “Gather” at Troutbeck in Amenia brings together a curious crowd of local entrepreneurs, artists, and others with a story to tell for an intimate midday chat. On Thursday, Jan. 16, floral designer Romane Recalde, owner of the newly opened Le Jardin in Amenia, took center stage to share her journey from modeling in Miami to cultivating flowers in the Hudson Valley. Gather is a place to share stories, swap advice, and celebrate some of the unique businesses that make our area vibrant — all with a delicious lunch on the side. The gatherings are unconventional in the best way, with no agenda beyond good conversation and community building.

Recalde’s story isn’t just about creating a flower shop; it’s about a complete reinvention of self. “I hated Miami so much,” said the French-born Recalde, recalling her time in Florida before moving to New York. She worked as a model in New York, and eventually met her husband, James. Their pandemic escape to Turks and Caicos turned into a six-month stay, which in turn led them to Millbrook and finally to their home in Amenia, where Recalde’s connection to nature blossomed.

Keep ReadingShow less
Mad Rose opens ‘Assembled’ exhibition
Mad Rose Gallery director Michael Flowers contributed to the gallery's "Assembled" exhibit with a series of collaged landscape photographs
Nathan Miller

Mad Rose Gallery’s “Assembled” exhibition opened Saturday, Jan. 18, with a public reception.

The eclectic exhibition — on view until March 2 at the gallery on the intersection of Routes 22 and 44 in Millerton — gathers together work from a group of diverse artists with decades of experience between them. The exhibition itself is true to the name, featuring photographs, sculptures, drawings and mixed media works in all shapes and sizes.

Keep ReadingShow less
The fragile bonds of family: a review of Betsy Lerner’s 'Shred Sisters'

Betsy Lerner’s 'Shred Sisters' is written with such verve and poetic imagination that it’s hard to fathom how it could be the author’s first novel. Ms. Lerner, 64, has worked for three decades as a literary agent, editor, and non-fiction writer, but at some point during the Covid pandemic — without any forethought — she sat down and typed out the first line of the novel exactly as it now appears in the book, and then completed it without telling anyone what she was up to.

The novel takes place over twenty years — from the 1970s into the ’90s — and is a kind of guide for that era. It reads like a memoir accompanied by some bouncy dialogue, but is actually a work of what’s called autofiction in which Lerner mixes her own experiences — including her own struggle with mental illness — with things she simply makes up. The fictional narrator is Amy Shred, the younger of two sisters in an upper-middle-class, secular Jewish family living in the suburbs of New Haven, Connecticut.

Keep ReadingShow less
Lazy, hazy days of...winter?

This small stream is fishable, despite the wintry conditions. It probably won't be a pleasant or productive experience, but it can be done.

Patrick L. Sullivan

When syndicated columnists run out of ideas they do one of two things.

First they collect the last couple year’s worth of columns and call it a book. These are published to great acclaim from other syndicated columnists and show up in due course in gigantic, ziggurat-shaped mounds at Costco for $4.98 a pop.

Keep ReadingShow less