It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Clinton`s Secret Iraq Wargames.

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 7 2006 @ 07:15 AM
link   
A series of secret wargames in 1999 by the Clinton Administration revealed the possible outcomes of a war with Iraq.
The simulation,called "Desert Crossing"suggested that a US led invasion would have ended up in chaos even with 400 000 troops on the ground.
Thats almost 3 times the number currently in Iraq.
 



www.cnn.com
# "A number of factors including aggressive neighbors, fragmentation along religious and/or ethnic lines, and chaos created by rival forces bidding for power could adversely affect regional stability."

# "Even when civil order is restored and borders are secured, the replacement regime could be problematic -- especially if perceived as weak, a puppet, or out-of-step with prevailing regional governments."

# "Iran's anti-Americanism could be inflamed by a U.S.-led intervention in Iraq," the briefings read. "The influx of U.S. and other western forces into Iraq would exacerbate worries in Tehran, as would the installation of a pro-western government in Baghdad."


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Surley the Bush Administration knew of these findings.
Which only reinforces to me that chaos was the objective from the word go.
Why else would Rummy send in so few troops?

This bit is telling isn`t it?


"The influx of U.S. and other western forces into Iraq would exacerbate worries in Tehran, as would the installation of a pro-western government in Baghdad."


How incredibly convenient is that?
Inflaming Iran`s anti americanism!
Just what the PNAC doctor ordered.
By sending in far too few ground troops,civil war and high casualties became a certainty.
I cannot believe any government is that stupid.
So I must assume that the present situation was planned.

[edit on 7-11-2006 by Silcone Synapse]




posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 10:37 AM
link   

# "Iran's anti-Americanism could be inflamed by a U.S.-led intervention in Iraq," the briefings read. "The influx of U.S. and other western forces into Iraq would exacerbate worries in Tehran, as would the installation of a pro-western government in Baghdad."

Let's look at this one quote one more time... "Iran's anti-americanism could be inflamed by US led intervention in Iraq"... the quote is referring to a stance that if you want to invade iraq you have to know the consequences. Bush (1)knowingly invaded iraq and also (2) knew that iran would get mad... the least Iran would do would be to drive the troops out of Iraq. Hmm.



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 10:46 AM
link   
They were looking at that scenario back then because everyone in the know, including Bill Clinton, knew that the War on Terror was imminent.

When are people going to understand that this war has been in the work for decades? It didn't just happen.

Peace



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 10:56 AM
link   
There's not 200.000 troops in Iraq? So it's like 2 times larger... and I don't think they care, it's not like their own children are being slaugthered for Halliburton's profits... it's more like the poors who are being killed...and they believe they are bringing democracy.. yeah right.



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 05:15 AM
link   
Correct Dr Love,
It was planned for decades.
It still truly amazes me that the Govt. would put such a small amount of ground troops in Iraq after this wargame proved how impossible it would be.
That and the constant barrage of comments on the MSM of late,priming us up for the "3 way ethnic split" of Iraq.
To many,this sounds like a new idea,which has come about because of the insurgents.
To me it sounds like the plan as outlined in:

"A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties"
Published by the
Association of Arab-American University Graduates, Inc.
Belmont, Massachusetts, 1982
Special Document No. 1
(ISBN 0-937694-56-8) "




"The idea that all the Arab states should be broken down, by Israel, into small units, occurs again and again in Israeli strategic thinking. For example, Ze'ev Schiff, the military correspondent of Ha'aretz (and probably the most knowledgeable in Israel, on this topic) writes about the "best" that can happen for Israeli interests in Iraq: "The dissolution of Iraq into a Shi'ite state, a Sunni state and the separation of the Kurdish part"
(Ha'aretz 6/2/1982).



new topics

top topics
 
7

log in

join