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.

 

The Israeli Origins Of Bush II's War

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 05:18 PM
link   
I came across this article and found it very enlightening. Apologies if this has already been discussed it just gave me a deeper intuition into the Israeli involvement in the 9/11 attacks, the Israeli/US lobby and the 'war on terror'. Be warned this article is quite long but well worth the read if you aren't up to date on the Israeli connection to the highest eccelons of power in the United States, especially the media and politics.

Here are some quotes from the article:




While the neoconservatives were the driving force behind the American invasion of Iraq and the consequent efforts to bring about regime change throughout the Middle East, the idea for such a war did not originate with American neocon thinkers but rather in Israel. An obvious linkage exists between the war position of the neocons and what has long been a strategy of the Israeli Right and, to a lesser extent, of the Israeli mainstream.





But even many neocons did not directly move to the idea that the United States would actually be the military instigator of destabilization in the Middle East. After the Bush I administration failed to occupy Iraq and remove Saddam in the Gulf War of 1991, as the neoconservatives would have liked, [28] the neocons were thinking in terms of an Israeli military venture, but one enjoying extensive American moral and political support. A clear illustration of the neocon view on this subject — and the intimate connection with Israeli security — was a 1996 paper titled "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm," published by an Israeli think tank, the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies. Included in the study group that produced it were men who would loom large in the Bush II administration's war policy in the Middle East — Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and David Wurmser. Perle was listed as the head of the study group. [29]





It is amazing how much of this program, though written for the Israeli government of Netanyahu of 1996, has already been implemented, not by the government of Israel, but by the Bush administration. The overthrow of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, the two-year-old house arrest of Arafat and the attempt to cultivate a new Palestinian leadership, the complete rejection by Sharon of the land for peace agreement on the Golan Heights, with little U.S. demurral, and the bombing inside of "Syria proper" with only the response from Bush, "Israel has a right to defend itself." [35]


The full article can be read here:

The Israeli Origins Of Bush II's War

Again, apologies if this has already been discussed on ATS I simply found it astonishing after all the mixed talk from 9/11 to the Iraq invasion and in trying to find out just what the US are doing with their imperialist agenda.

Big C




posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 05:31 PM
link   
Well , i read the following document after a SHORT web search. I personally do not agree with some points. However even what is in the document i found, is not exactly what described in the site.
Link:
www.israeleconomy.org...
There are similarities,however. Bur definitely not all written there was done. Check for yourself.



posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by ZeroKnowledge
 


The 'clean break' article was only a small part of the big picture I was trying to get across. I understand there could be differences in that and the US policies adapted but the point I was making is in the essay by Stephen Sniegoski and the wider context of the Israeli/US involvement in the 'war on terror'.

[edit on 10-4-2008 by BigC2012]



posted on Apr, 12 2008 @ 06:58 AM
link   
I have to say I am surprised at the little reaction to this essay because I certainly thought it gave me a better insight into 'Bush's war'. Maybe its already to obvious and I am a little bit slow on the uptake and in that case it wouldn't be the first time! Or maybe you guys are getting tired of hearing this kind of thing???




top topics
 
0

log in

join