DICK CHENEY, PROPHET

Only the omission of the Israel factor and the regional goals of the neocons  in paving the way for greater Israel detracts from an otherwise excellent analysis.

The Unraveling of Iraq is Playing Out Just as Dick Cheney Predicted

He launched a war that he knew would be futile and catastrophic.

“Everything is proceeding as I have foreseen.” — Emperor Palpatine, The Return of the Jedi

Jon Stewart made great comedic hay during the Bush Administration out of the enormity of Dick Cheney’s “Sith Lord” malevolence. Events in Iraq in the past week have made especially palpable Cheney’s Palpatine-like quality.

As Iraq unravels, you may suspect that Cheney might now be, along with his fellow Iraq War architects, wringing his hands over how President Obama ruined what still could have been a splendid little nation-building project. Yet, as radio host Scott Horton indicated recently, he is more likely looking on at the debacle, along with those who opposed both him and the war all along, as the arrival of the inevitable.

In the first Bush Administration, Cheney was Secretary of Defense, and helped plan the first invasion of Iraq during the Persian Gulf War. In that war, he agreed with the decision not go all the way and overthrow the dictator of Iraq, Saddam Hussein. This was extremely frustrating for the neocons, who were baying for Baghdad blood even then.

In a 1994 interview, Cheney was taken to task over this “missed opportunity” by the neocon American Enterprise Institute. Cheney defended the decision using the following predictions:

Once you got to Iraq and took it over, took down Saddam Hussein’s government, then what are you going to put in its place? That’s a very volatile part of the world, and if you take down the central government of Iraq, you could very easily end up seeing pieces of Iraq fly off: part of it, the Syrians would like to have to the west, part of it — eastern Iraq — the Iranians would like to claim, they fought over it for eight years. In the north you’ve got the Kurds, and if the Kurds spin loose and join with the Kurds in Turkey, then you threaten the territorial integrity of Turkey.

Let’s look at the events of this past week, and see how clear Cheney’s crystal ball was.

Cheney predicted Syrians taking over western Iraq. Western Iraq, including oil-rich Mosul (the second-largest city in the country), has indeed been taken over by a force entering from Syria: namely, ISIS (the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria), an Al Qaeda splinter group (and beneficiary of American military aid to the rebel forces in the Syrian civil war). True, it’s not the Syrian state, and only partially consists of Syrian people. But he got the geography right, and the demographics partially right.

Check.

Cheney predicted the Iranians taking eastern Iraq. The U.S. war that overthrew Saddam’s Sunni Muslim regime put the government and the capital in the east, Baghdad, into the hands of a Shi’ite regime allied with Shi’ite Iran, who backed the election of the current prime minister. And now Iran has actually deployed troops to combat ISIS into Iraq from the east. With the U.S. ground presence already mostly gone, and now rapidly evacuating, and Iraqi government soldiers stripping off their uniforms and abandoning their U.S.-supplied weapons to ISIS at the first sight of them, the Iranian troops are becoming the only serious ground force in the east.

Check.

Finally, Cheney predicted the Kurds spinning loose and being a threat in the north. The Kurds have indeed become autonomous, and recently seized the northern city of Kirkuk for themselves, after it was abandoned by Iraqi government forces fleeing the oncoming ISIS forces.

Check. That’s 3 for 3.

If Cheney knew a decade before the war, that overthrowing Saddam would never make Iraq an intact, independent “beacon of democracy” in the Middle East, why did he push for it so hard in 2003 anyway? It is interesting that, at the time of the interview, he wasn’t yet CEO of the oil field company and military contractor Halliburton; that tenure would start the following year, in 1995. But Juan Cole argued in 2004 that that’s not quite it.

What was in it for Cheney? I don’t think it was a matter of money. At least I hope it wasn’t. Cheney sold half his Halliburton stock options in 2000 for $5 million, and it is hard to imagine a man taking his country to war to increase the other half in value by a few million.

I suspect it is political. Not all corporations make money on war. Some actually lose money. But Halliburton, Bechtel and a few other components of the military industrial complex do benefit from war. Strengthening that sector of the American economy strengthens the political Right. Turning the republic into a praetorian state would permanently yield profits for the military industrial complex in such a way as to create a permanent Republican dominance of all the branches of the U.S. government.

In any case, what is clear is that the old “stupid or evil” question regarding our overlords in Washington is easy to answer in the case of Richard Bruce Cheney. What is particularly evil, is that he also had a keen sense of the high cost in American lives (not to mention Iraqi lives) that overthrowing Saddam would entail and the quagmire that would result from occupying Iraq.

It’s a quagmire if you go that far and try to take over Iraq. The other thing was casualties. Everyone was impressed with the fact we were able to do our job with as few casualties as we had. But for the 146 Americans killed in action, and for their families — it wasn’t a cheap war. And the question for the president, in terms of whether or not we went on to Baghdad, took additional casualties in an effort to get Saddam Hussein, was how many additional dead Americans is Saddam worth? Our judgment was, not very many, and I think we got it right.

And now, thanks to his change of “judgment,” 4,800 Americans and up to 500,000 Iraqis are dead, American resources valued at $2 trillion are squandered, Al Qaeda (which had absolutely no presence in Iraq prior to the invasion) effectively has an oil-rich state of its own bestriding Iraq and Syria, the successors of Al Qaeda in Iraq are romping all over the Middle East from Syria to Libya (often with U.S. support), Iraq is being rent asunder in a tug of literal war between neck-severing Sunni jihadists and Shi’ite death squads and torturers. And now the Washington elite are moving toward resuming air strikes, which will probably kill more innocent men, women, and children than the jihadists and the death squads combined.

Like Cassandra in legendary Troy, Dick Cheney knew exactly what futility, disaster, and carnage would come from a war. And yet, like Agamemnon, he launched it anyway.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
13 Comments
A. R. Wasem
A. R. Wasem
June 16, 2014 1:57 pm

No doubt that Cheney is one of the most evil and malignant figures in recent American political history. BC-LR to all

flash
flash
June 16, 2014 7:14 pm

On the Guess Who was right about Iraq thread , SSS accused me of having a selective memory, and he is correct. My memory always defaults to truth with assaulted with statist bullshit.

If SSS can justify the devastation of a nation and the subsequent mass slaughter by munitions , disease and lack of basic essentials to sustain life, because Saddam was a bad man , the obviously he’s traveled further down the rabbit hole of statist stupid than any sane, decent human should willingly go.

Apparently my snarky pic posted of a smilling Saddam with a caption spoofing Dubya’s Miss Me Yet billboard offended SSS. It was meant in jest, but SSS preferred to see it as an insult to his statist bent belief that it is the duty of these United State to involve itself first in nation destruction and then nation building and damn the cost to either wealth or life , because some few frikking oligarchial fools think they can rule the world as they see fit , for fun and profit, and at any cost to anyone….and this is why life , liberty and the pursuit of happiness is no longer an option , sans permits, license ,fees and taxation in much of the known world.

The oligarchs cannot sustain their power without ask-no-question enforcers like SSS , and tools like SSS can’t sustain their parasitical lifestyle without the power of the oligarchy to confiscate the wealth of the producers and pass in down to obsequious pawns…..and this is why life , liberty and the pursuit of happiness is no longer an option , sans permits, license ,fees and taxation in much of the known world.
Good work spook..

[img]

flash
flash
June 16, 2014 7:15 pm

one more..

[imgcomment image[/img]

flash
flash
June 16, 2014 7:30 pm

The veterans who helped commit a crime against humanity with an aggressive US war against Iraq, who helped in the murder by sanctions, bombs, depleted uranium, bullets of more than a million people and the destruction of an ancient society, who fought for Exxon and McDonald-Douglas and the empire, are feeling that their “sacrifices” were not, after all, worth it. Folks. as Ron Paul’s favorite antiwar song points out, the politicians and the generals and the munitions manufacturers can’t do it alone. They need the soldiers, and if young men refuse to fight wars of aggression, there wouldn’t be any more of them. Lew Rockwell

Hollow man
Hollow man
June 16, 2014 9:01 pm

An aggressive war would have been the ticket. Go in destroy leave. Coulda took a few month. There was to much money to be printed and handed out to buddies. So on it goes.

el Coyote
el Coyote
June 16, 2014 9:14 pm

Donovan is no Bob Dylan.

Iska Waran
Iska Waran
June 17, 2014 12:00 am

You just jumped the shark, Z.

Iska Waran
Iska Waran
June 17, 2014 12:06 am

Poor fucking Donovan.

el Coyote
el Coyote
June 17, 2014 1:00 am

And another thing, Cheney was not that prescient, Powell was babysitting these guys. The USA knows they have their strongmen and their assignment is to keep the inhabitants in line. Sadam did a good job using poison gas on the Kurds and had armed militias guarding the rest.

I almost asked why the USA turned on its former servant but then I remembered that is SOP.

flash
flash
June 17, 2014 6:04 am

frikkin’ hypocrites..the worse kind of liars..

Hello pot….U.S. officials have long denied acquiescing to Iraqi chemical attacks, insisting that Hussein’s government never announced he was going to use the weapons. But retired Air Force Col. Rick Francona, who was a military attaché in Baghdad during the 1988 strikes, paints a different picture.

“The Iraqis never told us that they intended to use nerve gas. They didn’t have to. We already knew,” he told Foreign Policy.

According to recently declassified CIA documents and interviews with former intelligence officials like Francona, the U.S. had firm evidence of Iraqi chemical attacks beginning in 1983.

flash
flash
June 17, 2014 6:06 am

link… …suck it SSS.

Investigation
Exclusive: CIA Files Prove America Helped Saddam as He Gassed Iran
The U.S. knew Hussein was launching some of the worst chemical attacks in history — and still gave him a hand.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/08/25/secret_cia_files_prove_america_helped_saddam_as_he_gassed_iran

flash
flash
June 17, 2014 6:37 am

Fire?????…more gas please.

Iraq Breaks Down, Oil Surges – The Context Underlying The Growing Crisis
The awkward part of this story is that if the US does get involved to help Baghdad out militarily, it would mean fighting on the same side as Iran (and against the forces the Saudi Arabia supports):

Iran sends troops into Iraq to aid fight against Isis militants

June 14, 2014

Iran has sent 2,000 advance troops to Iraq in the past 48 hours to help tackle a jihadist insurgency, a senior Iraqi official has told the Guardian.

The confirmation comes as the Iranian president, Hassan Rouhani, said Iran was ready to support Iraq from the mortal threat fast spreading through the country, while the Iraqi prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, called on citizens to take up arms in their country’s defence.

Addressing the country on Saturday, Maliki said rebels from the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isis) had given “an incentive to the army and to Iraqis to act bravely”. His call to arms came after reports surfaced that hundreds of young men were flocking to volunteer centres across Baghdad to join the fight against Isis.

In Iran, Rouhani raised the prospect of Teheran cooperating with its old enemy Washington to defeat the Sunni insurgent group – which is attempting to ignite a sectarian war beyond Iraq’s borders.

(Source)

No wonder Washington is hemming and hawing! There’s no way for Obama to send support to Baghdad without undercutting a lot of carefully laid anti-Iranian propaganda. What, we’re going to be fighting on the same side now as our longtime “Death to America!” adversary? Politically this is a real pickle.

But such an unnatural alliance may be happening:

US sends aircraft carrier to Persian Gulf as Obama considers air strikes in Iraq

June 14, 2014

The US is sending an aircraft carrier and two guided missile ships into the Persian Gulf, bolstering sea and airpower before a possible US strike on the jihadist army in Iraq in the coming days.

Defense secretary Chuck Hagel ordered the USS George HW Bush into the Gulf on Saturday, a day after President Barack Obama indicated he would soon decide on air strikes against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isis), whose seizure of Sunni Iraqi cities has violently upended the region.

(Source)

A bit ironic to be sending the USS George Bush, but there you have it. Once again, the US is poised to deliver more military solutions to what are, at heart, political problems.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-06-16/iraq-breaks-down-oil-surges-context-underlying-growing-crisis