[canuck_conservative]

"…it is a fact that the campaign to overthrow Saddam Hussein was initiated, well before 9/11, by a group of influential American neocons, notably Perle, Feith and Wolfowitz (once described by Time magazine as “the godfather of the Iraq war”) nearly all of whom were ardent Zionists, in many cases more concerned with preserving the security of Israel than that of the US."

This, unfortunately, is the truth.

How else to explain why the US, just attacked by terrorists based in AFGHANISTAN, suddenly decides to attack a country that had NOTHING to do with 9-11, and give Afghanistan low priority?

Bush was selfishly co-opted by trhe neo-cons.

[Yo-Yo]

How else to explain why the US, just attacked by terrorists based in AFGHANISTAN, suddenly decides to attack a country that had NOTHING to do with 9-11, and give Afghanistan low priority?

Good Day to my FRiend from the Great White North.

We did go into Afghanistan 17 months before we went into Iraq, bombing known al Qaeda training camps. and working with local rebel

Even though you might get the impression by listening to the mainstream media on the left that he had, George Bush never suggested that Iraq was involved directly in the 9/11 attacks.

Hussein, however, was supporting terrorists and terrorism in general, and was refusing UN inspectors to inspect his known WMD programs. The Bush Administration was very afraid that Hussein was going to make WMDs available to terrorists like al Qaeda, who would then use them on US soil. Therefore, after ramming through a UN Security Counsel resolution, invaded Iraq and overthrew the Hussein government.

As you may or may not be aware, for the decade between Operation Desert Storm and Operation Iraqi Freedom, US and allied aircraft had been in a low level war with Iraq. Operating from bases in Saudi Arabia to enforce the Northern and Southern no-fly zones in Iraq. US and allied forces flew daily combat air patrol sorties to protect the Kurds in the north, and the Shia in the south, from Hussein's military.

These no-fly combat patrols resulted in many ground strikes against anti-aircraft batteries, the destruction of Iraqi aircraft, and at least one accidental friendly fire incident against a UN Helicopter.

9/11 and the "certainty" of an Iraqi WMD program was enough to end the Hussein regime. The Bush Administration was very afraid of an Iraqi furnished dirty bomb, low yield nuclear bomb, or poisonous gas attack against a US city, in an attempt by al Qaeda to one-up themselves after felling the Twin Towers.

And in another ironic twist of fate, bin Laden's stated reason for the 9/11 attacks was because American forces were in Saudi Arabia, the 'holy land' of Mecca. Had US forces withdrawn from Saudi Arabian air bases after the 1991 Desert Storm conflict, instead of staying for another 12 years flying many hundreds of sorties per year against Iraq from Saudi soil, the 1998 US Embassy bombings, the 2000 USS Cole attack, and the 9/11 attack may never have occurred.

[Stultis]

"…it is a fact that the campaign to overthrow Saddam Hussein was initiated, well before 9/11, by a group of influential American neocons, notably Perle, Feith and Wolfowitz (once described by Time magazine as “the godfather of the Iraq war”) nearly all of whom were ardent Zionists, in many cases more concerned with preserving the security of Israel than that of the US."

This, unfortunately, is the truth.

If by "the truth," you mean, "a contemptible load of crap."

You may disagree with the policy recommendations of these individuals. That's one thing. But instead you assent in accusing these men -- all stalwart patriots with a long record of service, including trusted positions in the Reagan administration -- of treason. That's something else entirely. And it does not reflect on Perle, Feith and Wolfowitz; it reflects on YOU.

[wardaddy]

not all neoCons are Jewish..but a lot are I agree

very few Jewish Cultural Conservatives...Levin, Savage...sometimes Kristol...sometimes not.

[rmlew]

I disagree with the presumption that they are ardent Zionists. Iran was and is more of a threat to Israel than the Iraq of 2001. Israelis were clear about this. The Iraq war was about
1. Saddam Hussein's ongoing attcks on America from the assasination attempt on President George HW Bush to Salman Pak and the Philipines hijaking scheme of Al Qaeda.
2. The desire to move American forces from Saudi Arabia to Iraq.
3. The desire to open the oil pipelines in Iraq.
4. The Neoconservative delusion that the Muslim world is ready for democracy and that it can be brought by the sword.
And this last point is key because it shows the vacuous nature of their supposed Zionist goals. While they, like most Americans are Zionists, in so far as they support the continued existance of Israel, the truth is that their position hurt and could only hurt Israel.
1. In order to curry favor with Muslims, we pressured Israel on land and refused to recognize Jerusalem as the capitol of Israel.
2. If the neocon delusion were to to somehow succeed, it would hurt Israel. Most neocons claim to support Israel because it is "the only Democracy and ally in the region". If the Arab world were to change, this would end. Also, why support a racial state of Israel if the Arabs are good democrats? Why not have a bi-national state?

The ugly truth is that people throw around temps like "neoconservative" and "Zionist" with no thought of thier meaning. Of course said Zionists or neocons had no real power. If they did, Bush would not have given his stamp of approval to CAIR, the AADL, and other Muslim groups right after 9-11. The Oil lobbies, and many other groups vie for influence.

PS. Is Paul Wolfowitz still openly seeing a Muslim mistress?