The Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld “rush to war” was never about getting Osama Bin Laden

[Tom Paine 1949]

There is long-ignored evidence that the Taliban was willing to give up Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, both before and after 9/11, but that the U.S. refused — because our leaders were arrogant and wanted war.

These two articles from 2001 and 2004 should — like the lack of “Weapons of Mass Destruction” in Iraq — make people question our real aim in overthrowing the Taliban.

(Elsewhere I have emphasized our own culpability in arming the Mujaheddin jihadis and working with Islamic terrorists like Bin Laden in the first place.)

What do YOU think our real aim was in sending our troops into Afghanistan and Iraq?

Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over

How Bush Was Offered Bin Laden and Blew It - CounterPunch.org

 

[lennypartiv]

Flexing our military muscle is a good thing. Other countries see it and they know not to screw with us.

 

[talksalot]

There is long-ignored evidence that the Taliban was willing to give up Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, both before and after 9/11, but that the U.S. refused — because our leaders were arrogant and wanted war.

These two articles from 2001 and 2004 should — like the lack of “Weapons of Mass Destruction” in Iraq — make people question our real aim in overthrowing the Taliban.

(Elsewhere I have emphasized our own culpability in arming the Mujaheddin jihadis and working with Islamic terrorists like Bin Laden in the first place.)

What do YOU think our real aim was in sending our troops into Afghanistan and Iraq?

Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over

How Bush Was Offered Bin Laden and Blew It - CounterPunch.org

Clinton was offered Bin Laden before 9-11 but refused. 9-11 might not have happened if he had taken them up on their offer.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Clinton was offered Bin Laden before 9-11 but refused. 9-11 might not have happened if he had taken them up on their offer.

When was this? Which Clinton? Evidence please?

[The second link on my OP discusses Kabir Mohabbat’s reports to Clinton Administration officials, in 2000, before the election of Bush.]

 

[talksalot]

When was this? Which Clinton? Evidence please?

Bill....do your own research. It's common knowledge.
Also, it was Bush's enhanced interrogation that finally revealed the hiding place of bin Ladin. I'm just surprised that Obama had the balls to actually go in and get him.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Flexing our military muscle is a good thing. Other countries see it and they know not to screw with us.

Are you being ironic? What other countries see is that we use military power irresponsibly. That we fail in our objectives. That even when our enemies are primitive peasant soldiers, we fail. Was the goal all along just to destroy Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Libya?

 

[Concerned American]

There is long-ignored evidence that the Taliban was willing to give up Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, both before and after 9/11, but that the U.S. refused — because our leaders were arrogant and wanted war.

These two articles from 2001 and 2004 should — like the lack of “Weapons of Mass Destruction” in Iraq — make people question our real aim in overthrowing the Taliban.

(Elsewhere I have emphasized our own culpability in arming the Mujaheddin jihadis and working with Islamic terrorists like Bin Laden in the first place.)

What do YOU think our real aim was in sending our troops into Afghanistan and Iraq?

Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over

How Bush Was Offered Bin Laden and Blew It - CounterPunch.org

Of course it wasn't. W wanted to make an example of Saddam Hussein for making a laughing stock of his dad--not that Hussein had to work real hard at that task.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

The “War Against Terror” will never end so long as adventurist and unsustainable U.S. military interventions and occupations continue abroad. Some of these have clear profit-seeking or geo-political motives — e.g. to protect petro-dollar interests and control oil in the Persian Gulf. Others occur out of shear imperial egoism, or due to “Deep Security State” & Military Industrial Complex lobbyists. Often, at least until recently, they were aimed to appeal to “patriotic” but easily bamboozled U.S. domestic voters. In all these cases they tend to create more “enemies,” more disillusioned or betrayed ex-allies, more real or potential terrorists.

 

[surada]

There is long-ignored evidence that the Taliban was willing to give up Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, both before and after 9/11, but that the U.S. refused — because our leaders were arrogant and wanted war.

These two articles from 2001 and 2004 should — like the lack of “Weapons of Mass Destruction” in Iraq — make people question our real aim in overthrowing the Taliban.

(Elsewhere I have emphasized our own culpability in arming the Mujaheddin jihadis and working with Islamic terrorists like Bin Laden in the first place.)

What do YOU think our real aim was in sending our troops into Afghanistan and Iraq?

Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over

How Bush Was Offered Bin Laden and Blew It - CounterPunch.org

Clean Break Strategy and the PNAC demanded war against Saddam Hussein . Operation Mass Appeal began in Britain I 1998.

When the talks with the Taliban over a gas pipeline across Afghanistan broke
down the US invaded to try and save ENRON.. They were huge contributors to Dubya's campaign.

 

[jwoodie]

The “War Against Terror” will never end so long as adventurist and unsustainable U.S. military interventions and occupations continue abroad. Some of these have clear profit-seeking or geo-political motives — e.g. to protect petro-dollar interests and control oil in the Persian Gulf.

So why do you support the war in Ukraine and oppose US energy independence?

 

[Augustine_]

There is long-ignored evidence that the Taliban was willing to give up Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, both before and after 9/11, but that the U.S. refused — because our leaders were arrogant and wanted war.

These two articles from 2001 and 2004 should — like the lack of “Weapons of Mass Destruction” in Iraq — make people question our real aim in overthrowing the Taliban.

(Elsewhere I have emphasized our own culpability in arming the Mujaheddin jihadis and working with Islamic terrorists like Bin Laden in the first place.)

What do YOU think our real aim was in sending our troops into Afghanistan and Iraq?

Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over

How Bush Was Offered Bin Laden and Blew It - CounterPunch.org

From a political standpoint those in power thought it would help their political aspirations by appealing to the religious right by crusading against Muslims in the Middle East. From a financial standpoint we had the opportunity for big profits for oil companies and for defense contractors. I'm sure there must have been an element of wanting to make the world a better/safer place but we all saw how quickly and easily that was abandoned.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Glad this two-year-old OP of mine has re-ignited some interest. My opposition to American adventurism abroad and to U.S. “imperialism” has been longstanding and consistent since Vietnam War days.

So why do you support the war in Ukraine and oppose US energy independence?

Here jwoodie raises an appropriate question, at least regarding Ukraine.

I certainly do NOT oppose “U.S. energy independence”! Our country is fortunate that it has the resources and technology to be energy independent, is today a major energy exporter, and has the ability to develop alternative energy resources that are crucial to perpetuating and securing our energy needs in the future.

As for Ukraine, I long opposed what I foresaw as the bipartisan drift to war with Russia over Ukraine. I discouraged extreme Ukrainian nationalism, did not support the “Maidan Revolution” but also opposed the heavy-handed Russian imperial attitude of superiority and abuse of Ukrainian aspirations for democratic reform.

The real desire of Ukrainians for more genuine independence from Russian oligarchical control and the desire of a new generation to move closer to Western Europe was completely understandable, and we saw it expressed over time not just at Maidan but in the Orange Revolution as well (2004-2005). Those of us who hoped for a genuinely democratic binational Ukraine of course were disappointed, but the blame here lies not just on any one side.

The final decision of Putin to invade and try to destroy an independent Ukraine entirely changed everything. This was qualitatively more than retaking (with practically no casualties) overwhelmingly Russian Crimea after Maidan in 2014. After the rise of rightwing populism (especially Trump’s 2016-2020 rule) Putin felt the West and the U.S. were clearly too divided to act decisively, and he deeply underestimated the power of Ukrainian nationalism and overestimated his own military. The corruption of Russian society and his own isolation proved fatal when put to the test. He was warned, but chose to believe the lie that the Biden Administration was weak. His blatant lies discredited him and his bloody invasion failed — at least so far.

Putin has discredited Russia even in the eyes of XiJinping and the Chinese CP, whom he failed to inform of his invasion beforehand.

It is not a question of “supporting the war.” Few Americans “wanted” or want this war, and even the Pentagon believed the Russians would win it quickly. But given the blatant violation of Ukrainian sovereignty and the larger issues at stake, aiding Ukraine financially and militarily and opposing Russian imperialist chauvinism and adventurism in Eastern Europe has become absolutely necessary. Our steadiness here will likely serve as a warning to XiJinping as well.

None of this rules out a cold freezing and temporary ceasefire in the future if the battle lines remain more or less static. It is a terrible situation for Ukraine especially, but it is not a situation that can be helped by our abandoning the struggle Ukrainians are themselves waging against a cruel and viciously chauvinist “great power” that wishes to destroy them.

 

[surada]

From a political standpoint those in power thought it would help their political aspirations by appealing to the religious right by crusading against Muslims in the Middle East. From a financial standpoint we had the opportunity for big profits for oil companies and for defense contractors. I'm sure there must have been an element of wanting to make the world a better/safer place but we all saw how quickly and easily that was abandoned.

Read clean break strategy. Israel wanted Saddam taken out.

 

[Concerned American]

Read clean break strategy. Israel wanted Saddam taken out.

Hussein wanted Israel taken out. You folks need to learn that offensive actions will bring immediate retribution from Israel. If you don't want to be attacked, then quit attacking.

 

[surada]

Hussein wanted Israel taken out. You folks need to learn that offensive actions will bring immediate retribution from Israel. If you don't want to be attacked, then quit attacking.

Iraq was crippled by 2 decades of war and sanctions. They were no threat to Israel or anyone else.

 

[Concerned American]

Iraq was crippled by 2 decades of war and sanctions. They were no threat to Israel or anyone else.

Who's fault was that? Cry me a river. Iraq, Iran, Syria have been rattling their swords at the world for over 40 years. They deserve to be decimated. You reap what you sow.

 

[AMart]

There is long-ignored evidence that the Taliban was willing to give up Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, both before and after 9/11, but that the U.S. refused — because our leaders were arrogant and wanted war.

These two articles from 2001 and 2004 should — like the lack of “Weapons of Mass Destruction” in Iraq — make people question our real aim in overthrowing the Taliban.

(Elsewhere I have emphasized our own culpability in arming the Mujaheddin jihadis and working with Islamic terrorists like Bin Laden in the first place.)

What do YOU think our real aim was in sending our troops into Afghanistan and Iraq?

Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over

How Bush Was Offered Bin Laden and Blew It - CounterPunch.org

Project for the New American Century - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Clinton was offered Bin Laden before 9-11 but refused. 9-11 might not have happened if he had taken them up on their offer.

Really? Where can I read about that?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Read clean break strategy. Israel wanted Saddam taken out.

Of course, as he was a threat to them, when that strategy was written. Who can blame them? They were tired of reacting to attacks from the death cult.

 

[surada]

Who's fault was that? Cry me a river. Iraq, Iran, Syria have been rattling their swords at the world for over 40 years. They deserve to be decimated. You reap what you sow.

Damn, you're really ignorant.