Friday, September 14, 2007

Own goal: Bush sponsored al-Qaeda

In his recent televised address US president Bush landed a serious own goal. Media commentators almost exclusively focused on his promise of troop reductions which the president announced and tried to make out as the result of a successful campaign in Iraq rather than an acknowledgement of ultimate defeat. Yet, the recurrent theme in the Bush address is the struggle to drive al-Qaeda out of Iraq and deny them a safe haven there. He makes the case, for example, that the people of Anbar province were suffering under the Taleban-like rule of al-Qaeda and asked the US to intervene, which ultimately drove al-Qaeda out, although it did not eliminate it as a threat. Likewise, he states that Diyala province was a sanctuary for al-Qaeda, but is no more. Mentioning al-Qaeda no less than eleven times in his short address makes them the central theme of the Bush Iraq strategy.

Leaving aside the highly suspect claims that al-Qaeda is operating successfully inside Iraq and trying to make the country its power base, the September 11 commission in the US, for all its failings to deal with most of the crucial evidence of 9/11, dismissed any link between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda. Whilst the Bush administration used al-Qaeda as an excuse to invade Iraq, any intelligence analyis worth his salt understood these links to be politically contrived. So if al-Qaeda has become a serious problem in Iraq, as the president is trying to assert, then his administration must be credited with having introduced al-Qaeda to Iraq. Far from making the world a safer place, therefore, they created a lingering problem in the region which continues to haunt them.

In his obsession with al-Qaeda, president Bush is also demolishing his other hobby horse argument, namely that Iran is fuelling and supporting the Iraqi insurgency. "One year ago, Shia extremists and Iranian-backed militants were gaining strength and targeting Sunnis for assassination. Today, these groups are being broken up and many of their leaders are being captured or killed.", he asserts, missing the point entirely, that al-Qaeda is defined as a Sunni terrorist organisation which considers Shia Muslims to be disbelievers and legitimate targets. It is unperceivable, therefore, that Iran would sponsor such an organisation.

In his televised speech Bush tried to placate the public mood which had turned seriously against him by offering a troop withdrawal on the near horizon. Instead, he has once more made a total fool of himself.

3 Comments:

At 14 September 2007 at 14:53, Blogger Susan Menchey said...

As I have said before, in what mysterious parallel universe can this fool and bumbler possibly expand his failed war into Iran? I realize my point of view is not popular, and I am not saying Bush would not, in his mysterious and sick fantasy world, LIKE to expand his murdering and pillage into Iran. I am just saying it is politically impossible.

It is also logistically impossible, as there are no men and materiel to carry it out. I was told two years ago the capability was there but no more, and Thank God. Can someone then explain to me why this Iran invasion did not take place two years ago? Again, to make these evil people out to be omnipotent serves no purpose. They are fools.

 
At 16 September 2007 at 12:47, Anonymous Anonymous said...

They can use nukes on Iran, as some Zionists behind Bush have threatened.

Politics is dead, only the mass media give exposure to these people...they have nothing to say...they are cardboard cut outs...I doubt if anyone gives any credence to these people. Is there any doubt that all they want is power and that Bush is just a puppet?

Its time people woke up from the stupor and got these people out of office and on trial, including the puppet masters behind them.

 
At 25 September 2007 at 15:53, Anonymous Anonymous said...

September 4, 2007
Jean Bricmont
Why Bush Can Get Away with Attacking Iran
Israel and its fanatical American supporters want Iran attacked for its political crimes--supporting the rights of the Palestinians, or questioning the Holocaust. Both U.S. political parties are equally under the control of the Israel lobby, and so are the media. The antiwar movement is far too preoccupied with the security of Israel to seriously defend Iran and it won't attack the real architects of this coming war--the Zionists-- for fear of "provoking antisemitism". Blaming Big Oil for the Iraq war was quite debatable, but, in the case of Iran, since the country is about to be bombed but not invaded, there is no reason whatsoever to think that Big Oil wants the war, as opposed to the Zionists. In fact, Big Oil is probably very much opposed to the war, but it is as unable to stop it as the rest of us.

As far as Israel is concerned, the United States is a de facto totalitarian society--no articulate opposition is acceptable. The U.S. Congress passes one pro-Israel or anti-Iran resolution after another with "Stalinist" majorities. The population does not seem to care. But if they did, but what could they do? Vote? The electoral system is extremely biased against the emergence of a third party and the two big parties are equally under Zionist influence.

http://counterpunch.org/bricmont09042007.html

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home