Bush planned the invasion to Iraq before 9/11

#1 Postby **cycloneye** » Sun Jan 11, 2004 8:11 am

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/ ... index.html

Paul O Neill exsecretary of the tresury said it on 60 minutes.A few days after Bush took office he was already planning the Iraq invasion he says.

Do you believe Mr O.Neill is right or he is saying this after he was fired and now wants to see Bush look bad?

GalvestonDuck · #2 Postby **GalvestonDuck** » Sun Jan 11, 2004 8:39 am

I can imagine that after Bush took office, he discussed a lot of different issues - foreign, domestic, economic, etc. Iraq may have been mentioned, but I seriously doubt it was in reference to a pre-emptive strike. Probably more along the lines of, "Well, they're still a problem since they've never fully cooperated with weapons inspectors. I'd say we still need to keep an eye out for them."

If anything was planned, why'd he wait til now to mention it?

mf_dolphin · #3 Postby **mf_dolphin** » Sun Jan 11, 2004 8:50 am

It's common practise to have war orders prepared for any possible area of conflict. With Saddam's continued defiance of UN agreements, this only makes sense to me. We also have plans prepared for Russia, China, N Korea, Iran and dozens of other places I'm sure. Just another case of the media putting the worse possible spin on things to sensationalize what has been common practise for decades...

rainstorm · #4 Postby **rainstorm** » Sun Jan 11, 2004 9:52 am

makes sense that he would prepare for a war in iraq.

#5 Postby **Stephanie** » Sun Jan 11, 2004 11:13 am

I'm sure it was in the back of his mind that this would be a possibility.

#6 Postby **wx247** » Sun Jan 11, 2004 12:07 pm

Depends on if the Bush administration denies it or not... if they deny then they are stupid. Of course they had a plan. Like Marshall mentioned, they have plans for war and such with other countries preplanned so they are not caught off guard.

timNms · #7 Postby **timNms** » Sun Jan 11, 2004 2:06 pm

In my opinion, whether he had a plan or not, is not important. What is important is the fact that one evil dictator in this world was stopped and the people of that country now have a chance to live in a democratic society.
I know this thread was not started to put down the president. But I feel the need to vent a little lol.
I am sick of hearing people put our president down. I, for one, am proud of him. I've noticed that when he says something, you can pretty well bank on it happening. In my opinion, Sadaam should have been done away with in the early 90's during desert storm.

#8 Postby **streetsoldier** » Sun Jan 11, 2004 2:17 pm

wx247, no Administration should EVER tip their hand in war planning; FI, the official records for WW II as to sensitive activities, actual manpower, etc., is under a 72-year "freeze"...until all the persons involved are dead.

I ran into this as a WW II reenactor, seeking records...it IS there under Federal law.

Same with some Korean and Vietnam records, Grenada, etc.

It is NEVER a "good idea" to let loose how out National Security apparatus works, or "who did what and how"..all that does is tell our enemies, who can and will use the information against us.

THIS is why, in wartime, there is much that doesn't get coverage until well after the deed is done...and why the Democrat's call for full disclosure is STUPID at best.

Rainband · #9 Postby **Rainband** » Sun Jan 11, 2004 3:45 pm

I am surprised this didn't come out before this..meaning someone didn't make this accusation earlier :roll:

This is nothing but a lie. I am sure he discussed Iraq as any President would...their history precedes them but A plan for an invasion...I'll believe the moon is made out of green cheese before I buy that one :wink:

rainstorm · #10 Postby **rainstorm** » Sun Jan 11, 2004 4:29 pm

it was also pointed out that clinton had an invasion plan as well. just standard procedure.

blizzard · #11 Postby **blizzard** » Sun Jan 11, 2004 5:41 pm

I am sure that the only reason that he is bringing this up now is to try and put a black eye somewhere, where it doesn't belong to help out the opponents campaign for presidency. Bitterness.

Lindaloo · #12 Postby **Lindaloo** » Sun Jan 11, 2004 6:33 pm

rainstorm wrote:it was also pointed out that clinton had an invasion plan as well. just standard procedure.

He didn't have to plan one... not like he was gonna use it. lol.

Skywatch_NC · #13 Postby **Skywatch_NC** » Sun Jan 11, 2004 6:39 pm

O'Neill's way of 'revenge' (in part) for his having been fired...smearing Bush!
:roll:

Eric

JQ Public · #14 Postby **JQ Public** » Sun Jan 11, 2004 7:10 pm

Actually in the book it talks about premptive strikes as well as nation rebuilding and divisions of oil, were all talked about before 9/11.

#15 Postby **streetsoldier** » Sun Jan 11, 2004 8:13 pm

JQ, these are all security issues dealt with by whoever is in the White House regardless of party, and this clown should have known better than to make these matters public. :grrr:

Sounds like "sour grapes" to me...and doesn't "help" anyone except the terrorists, and those Dems unscrupulous to employ them (read: all of the DNC "wannabes"). :roll:

Yep Bill already some of the democratic candidates for president are using this as their campains.

ColdFront77 · #16 Postby **ColdFront77** » Mon Jan 12, 2004 4:23 am

Skywatch_NC wrote:O'Neill's way of 'revenge' (in part) for his having been fired...smearing Bush!

Eric

I agree and we (Americans) have known Saddam Hussien has been an evil dictator for decades. The time was going to come and President Bush saw it reasonable and things could of esculated because of Tuesday, September 11th, 2001.

Something had to be done with this evil man.

Bush planned the invasion to Iraq before 9/11

Bush planned the invasion to Iraq before 9/11

Who is online