And so it begins...
“The only acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility that Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction. In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake military action as diplomacy is clearly failing. In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. That now needs to become the aim of American foreign policy.”
Letter to President Clinton January 26, 1998
Signed by such notables neos as Elliott Abrams, Richard L. Armitage, William J. Bennett, John Bolton, Robert Kagan, William Kristol, Richard Perle, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz.
Infamous names we would be hearing much more from in the run-up and aftermath of the bumbling Iraq policy the above people are responsible for.
"An effective military campaign combined with a political strategy to support the broad opposition forces in Iraq could well bring his regime down faster than many imagine."
William Kristol & Robert Kagan
January 30, 1998
Yes. No question he could be brought down by American military force. Problem is, and then what? The Neocons never provided an answer to that question.
"...what concerns our allies now is whether the Bush Administration has “a workable plan for a post-Saddam Hussein Iraq?"
July 22, 2002
MEMORANDUM TO: OPINION LEADERS
FROM: GARY SCHMITT
SUBJECT: Iraq
Turns out our allies were justified in their concern. Reality was, the Neocons never had a workable plan for a post-Saddam Iraq.
Back to 1998 and the policy of containment...
"Who honestly believes this administration will be capable of sustaining a containment policy for another six months, much less into the next century?"
William Kristol & Robert Kagan
February 26, 1998
Turns out containment not only "worked" for the next six months but up until the time we implemented the policy Bill and Bob worked so hard to push, it was still working.
Then concerning illusions.
"It is not the "hard-liners" who refuse to come to grips with the full dimension of the Iraq crisis and what will be required to secure American interests. On the contrary, it is those who cling to the illusion of "containment" or "containment-plus" who refuse to confront the likely consequences of their strategy -- a Saddam, stonger, with weapons of mass destruction."
January 7, 1999
MEMORANDUM TO: OPINION LEADERS
FROM: MARK LAGON
Oh I think time has illustrated who really refused to "come to grips" and who suffered illusions about a great many things concerning Iraq. And it turned out to be those very "hard-liners".
And from Reuel Marc Gerecht, May 14, 2001
"Totalitarians have a sixth sense for democratic weakness."
Sadly the American people have learned this first hand. Sounds like someone had an a prophetic if not intimate knowledge of that sad reality.
And...
"Sunni-Shi'ite problems are no doubt in Iraq's future, but the possibility of Iraqi democracy must not be jettisoned for the illusion that there is any cheap, quick, Sunni-officer-delivered escape from the need to extirpate the Ba'ath. We must not deny the democratic chance for fear of an Iraqi-Iranian Shi'ite collusion upsetting the balance of power in the Middle East. This kind of fraternity between Iraqi and Iranian Shi'ites simply does not exist -- except in the minds of Republican "realists" who tragically used this argument a decade ago."
Wrong again. Turns out the "realists" were right after all.
Then October 12, 2002 as war nears, Bill Kristol is overcome with excitement of his dreams nearing fullfillment. It's like Christmas. In fact, he sounds downright giddy and gleeful when he says...
"Has anyone had a better six weeks than George W. Bush? Just before Labor Day, the American people were uncertain about the need to act soon to remove Saddam Hussein. The Bush administration itself seemed to be in disarray. Senators and House members were objecting to a broad grant of authority to the president to use force. And our allies were even more unhappy than usual.
Then the president called in the congressional leadership, went to the United Nations and made his case. The country now supports him. His administration is at least publicly united behind him. He has won large bipartisan majorities in Congress. And he is likely to prevail in the U.N. Security Council."
Is it any wonder that Iraq could turn out like it did with so many willfully naive people pushing for so long for what would become failed policy.
That anyone would actually listen to these guys now is beyond comprehension.