Originally posted by timinatoria:
Originally posted by Nat Algren:
Iran has not invaded anyone in 188 years. Israel on the other hand...................
Lol.....yeah, why invade when you can just be the worlds largest sponsor of terrorism? Iran is just a peaceful, tolerant country that's been bullied by Israel.
Oh, I almost forgot, Death to America!!!
Posted from
Rivals Mobile
In the case of our leaders in Washington, you can invade and sponsor terrorism.
Neoconservatives Planned Regime Change Throughout the Middle East and North Africa 20 Years Ago
Posted on November 28, 2011 by WashingtonsBlog
Iraq ☑ Libya ☑
Syria ☐ Lebanon ☐ Somalia ☐ Sudan ☐ Iran ☐
I've repeatedly documented that the Neocons planned regime change in Iraq, Libya, Iran, Syria and a host of other countries right after 9/11
if not before.
And that Obama is implementing these same plans - just with a "kindler, gentler" face.
Glenn Greenwald provides further documentation that the various Middle Eastern and North African wars were planned before 9/11:
General Wesley Clark
said the aim of this plot [to "destroy the governments in
Iraq,
Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran"] was this: "They wanted us to destabilize the Middle East, turn it upside down, make it under our control." He then recounted a conversation he had had ten years earlier with Paul Wolfowitz - back in 1991 - in which the then-number-3-Pentagon-official, after criticizing Bush 41 for not toppling Saddam, told Clark: "But one thing we did learn [from the Persian Gulf War] is that we can use our military in the region - in the Middle East - and the Soviets won't stop us. And we've got about 5 or 10 years to clean up those old Soviet regimes - Syria, Iran [sic], Iraq - before the next great superpower comes on to challenge us." Clark said he was shocked by Wolfowitz's desires because, as Clark put it: "the purpose of the military is to start wars and change governments? It's not to deter conflicts?"
n the aftermath of military-caused regime change in Iraq and Libya
with concerted regime change efforts now underway aimed at Syria and Iran, with active and escalating proxy fighting in Somalia, with a modest military deployment to South Sudan, and the active use of drones in six - count 'em: six - different Muslim countries, it is worth asking whether the neocon dream as laid out by Clark is dead or is being actively pursued and fulfilled, albeit with means more subtle and multilateral than full-on military invasions (it's worth remembering that neocons specialized in dressing up their wars in humanitarian packaging: Saddam's rape rooms! Gassed his own people!). As Jonathan Schwarz
put it about the supposedly contentious national security factions:
As far as I can tell, there's barely any difference in goals within the foreign policy establishment. They just disagree on the best methods to achieve the goals. My guess is that everyone agrees we have to continue defending the mideast from outside interference (I love that Hillary line), and the [Democrats] just think that best path is four overt wars and three covert actions, while the neocons want to jump straight to seven wars.
***
The neocon end as Clark reported them - regime change in those seven countries - seems as vibrant as ever. It's just striking to listen to Clark describe those 7 countries in which the neocons plotted to have regime change back in 2001, and then compare that to what the U.S. Government did and continues to do since then with regard to those precise countries.
Update: We found actual video clips of Clarke explaining the long-standing plans for regime change
In the following clip, Clarke says:
I had been through the Pentagon right after 9/11. About ten days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to work for me, and one of the generals called me in. He said, "Sir, you've got to come in and talk to me a second." I said, "Well, you're too busy." He said, "No, no." He says, "We've made the decision we're going to war with Iraq." This was on or about the 20th of September.
***
So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, "Are we still going to war with Iraq?" And he said, "Oh, it's worse than that." He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, "I just got this down from upstairs" - meaning the Secretary of Defense's office - "today." And he said, "This is a memo that describes how we're going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran."
And in this clip, Clarke says:
It came back to me
a 1991 meeting I had with Paul Wolfowitz.
***
In 1991, he was the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy - the number 3 position at the Pentagon. And I had gone to see him when I was a 1-Star General commanding the National Training Center.
***
And I said, "Mr. Secretary, you must be pretty happy with the performance of the troops in Desert Storm."
And he said: "Yeah, but not really, because the truth is we should have gotten rid of Saddam Hussein, and we didn't
But one thing we did learn [from the Persian Gulf War] is that we can use our military in the region - in the Middle East - and the Soviets won't stop us. And we've got about 5 or 10 years to clean up those old Soviet client regimes - Syria, Iran, Iraq - before the next great superpower comes on to challenge us."
link w/ videos
