This is his comment on the discussion with President Bush on 9/13/01 with regards to if they were going to attack Iraq or not...
"On the surface of the debate it at least appeared to be about not whether but when. There seemed to be a kind of agreement that, yes it should be, but the disagreement was whether it should be in the immediate response or whether you should concentrate simply on
and here's Wolfie on why they chose to say they were attacking Iraq because they had WMD's despite the fact there was no evidence Iraq had anything to do with 9/11 or that they had any chance to restart a WMD program and there was heated debate that Iraq should be on the agenda at all...
“For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction, because it was the one reason everyone could agree on.” - Paul Wolfowitz
It's nice to know that it was a "bureaucratic" thing...it was an easy sell that's the thing...
and here's another wonderful little bit about Wolfie and his plans going back to 1992...
In 1992, then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney had a strategy report drafted for the Department of Defense, written by Paul Wolfowitz, then Under-Secretary of Defense for Policy. In it, the U.S. government was urged, as the world's sole remaining Superpower, to move aggressively and militarily around the globe. The report called for pre-emptive attacks and ad hoc coalitions, but said that the U.S. should be ready to act alone when "collective action cannot be orchestrated." The central strategy was to "establish and protect a new order" that accounts "sufficiently for the interests of the advanced industrial nations to discourage them from challenging our leadership," while at the same time maintaining a military dominance capable of "deterring potential competitors from even aspiring to a larger regional or global role." Wolfowitz outlined plans for military intervention in Iraq as an action necessary to assure "access to vital raw material, primarily Persian Gulf oil" and to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and threats from terrorism.
and there is also this little nugget from a PNAC paper that was dreamed up by a group including: Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, James Woolsey, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Bill Kristol, James Bolton, Zalmay M. Khalilzad, William Bennett, Dan Quayle, Jeb Bush, I. Lewis Libby, Elliot Abrams, Dov Zakheim, and John Bolton.
These guys published a paper in 2000 that stated:
"...the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event -- like a new Pearl Harbor."
These guys of course held or hold these positions in the Bush administration: Cheney is Vice President, Rumsfeld is Defense Secretary, Wolfowitz is Deputy Defense Secretary, I. Lewis Libby is Cheney's Chief of Staff, Elliot Abrams is in charge of Middle East policy at the National Security Council, Dov Zakheim is comptroller for the Defense Department, John Bolton is Undersecretary of State, Richard Perle is chair of the Defense Policy advisory board at the Pentagon, former CIA director James Woolsey is on that panel as well.
The whole Project for a New American Century crew...oh well, it's all been stated here before and I guess there's a large segment of the population that finds none of this odd or unusual....
Pat? Any thoughts on any of the above info?
