Bush Administration's 'Iraq War Architects' Defend Decision to Invade Iraq, Call for More Troops in the Arab World
Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, and Donald Rumsfeld listen to President George W. Bush speakBY: Nisreen Eadeh/Staff Writer
Every year on September 11, the United States looks back on the years since the fateful attacks in 2001 to assess whether the country is better now than it was then. One segment of American history that is consistently attached to 9/11 remembrances is the Iraq War, and whether or not it was justified.
Around the time of the 15th anniversary of 9/11, architects of the Iraq War were interviewed by the news media to hear their opinions on the current state of U.S. foreign policy. While some from the Bush Administration are trying to distance themselves from their responsibility in the Iraq War, others are calling for stronger U.S. military presence in the Arab world.
The U.S. invasion of Iraq in March of 2003 was not directly related to the 9/11 terrorist attacks; rather, President Bush used 9/11 as an excuse to call for war. Before invading Iraq, President Bush told Americans that Iraqi Dictator Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, was linked to al-Qaeda, and was a threat to Americans and Iraqi civilians alike.
American soldiers pose for a photo under the “Hands of Victory” in Ceremony Square, Baghdad, Iraq during Operation Iraqi Freedom.After it was revealed that there were no weapons of mass destruction, American involvement in Iraq seemed futile. Nevertheless, President Bush and his war architects asserted that this war was “liberating” Iraqis and going to bring a stable government. Shortly after in 2004, the Iraq War was designated “illegal” by the United Nations because Bush did not gain permission from the UN Security Council to invade the country, nor was he reacting to an attack from Iraq – two qualifiers necessary by international law to declare war on another country.
When the Chilcot Report was released in July of this year, American suspicions about the Iraq War were confirmed: President Bush knew that weapons of mass destruction were not in Iraq before invading the country. The Bush Administration adopted a policy of regime change in Iraq in late 2001, and then proselytized the media into believing that there were stockpiles of chemical and nuclear weapons in Iraq throughout 2002. This made it easy for the majority of Congress to support an Iraq invasion.
Overwhelmingly, Americans agree that the Iraq War was a mistake, including most of the 2016 presidential candidates, both Republican and Democrat. Despite new information in recent years about what exactly was known about Saddam Hussein, Iraq War architects are still dangerously defending this blunder of a war that has left over one million innocent Iraqis dead.
Here are the recent statements made by former Bush Administration officials:
1. Former Secretary of State Colin Powell
It has been held by many Arab Americans that Powell was the least at fault for the illegal invasion of Iraq. In an interview on NBC’s Meet the Press on September 4, 2016, Powell said, “If we had known the intelligence was wrong, we would not have gone into Iraq.” He acknowledged that the U.S. made “terrible strategic mistakes,” but still defended the decision to invade Iraq.
What’s troublesome is that Powell is failing to admit that the intelligence was fabricated around the anti-Iraq policy set by Bush only days after 9/11 in 2001. And the former secretary’s decision to continue defending the war got him into a tricky situation only a week later.
On September 11, 2016, an onlooker heckled Powell during another TV interview taking place at the new National Museum for African American History and Culture in Washington, DC. The heckler yelled, “You know better, Colin Powell, as a black man in America… You dropped bombs on Iraq.”
Powell was unfazed by the incident and jokingly asked the CBS reporters, “Is he one of yours?”
Americans should expect seriousness and honesty from its government leaders, whether serving in office or not. Powell’s joking response to a very somber reminder of career is no way to show respect to those murdered under his watch.
2. Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld
Rumsfeld is perhaps most notoriously known as the mastermind behind Abu Ghraib, where he administered the illegal and unjust torture of hundreds of Iraqis by American soldiers during the Iraq War.
In an interview with FOX News on June 22, the former secretary stated: “The U.S. needs to act again like a Superpower again. Obama has created a vacuum in the world so the friends of the U.S. are less certain of U.S. support leaving more opportunities for the enemies of the U.S. to do whatever they want.”
Despite the fact that President Bush was one of the least liked American presidents in the international community, Rumsfeld is comfortable accusing President Obama of negatively affecting relationships with allies.
Rumsfeld completely deflected blame from himself for creating the Iraq War, which is widely believed to be a prominent cause in the rise to ISIL and instability in the Levant today.
3. Former Vice President Dick Cheney
Quipped as the real decision maker during the Bush administration, Cheney joined Rumsfeld in blaming President Obama entirely for instability in the Levant.
In an op-ed he published on September 9, 2016 in the Wall Street Journal, Cheney lashed out at President Obama and called on the country to significantly increase its defense budget, nuclear arsenal, military operations, and weapons inventory. He claimed that the country is in far more danger than ever before, especially 15 years after 9/11.
“Imagine a world where the terrorists and their leading state sponsor have nuclear weapons. Fifteen years after 9/11, we can say with certainty that this is the world that will be created by withdrawal and retreat—by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton’s policies—if we don’t reverse course.”
Cheney and Bush are the people that tricked America into believing that alleged terrorist had nuclear weapons once before and they were wrong. The former vice president is still clinging to this idea that invasions bring stability, even though that was adequately proven false by his war’s failures.
4. Former Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz
Also speaking to the press on September 11, 2016 was Wolfowitz – officially nicknamed the “architect of the Iraq War” – who sat down with Chuck Todd on NBC’s Meet the Press. During his interview, Wolfowitz downplayed his role in the Iraq War and vehemently asserted that President Bush did not mislead the American people to go to war.
“People who say after the fact that Bush lied and got us into a war, he wasn’t lying. He was saying what everyone believed…”
After being pressed to say who did lie to the American people then, Wolfowitz deflected the question and held that everyone thought the intelligence was correct.
Of course, after realizing the failures of the Iraq War, Wolfowitz used the interview to reject his title as architect because he “was not the commander-in-chief, or even the secretary of state, the secretary of defense, or national security advisor.” Wolfowitz had no problem releasing himself of any responsibility, simply because he was not a senior official.
5. Former Vice President of Booz Allen Hamilton James Woolsey
One of the lesser-known influencers from the Bush era was James Woolsey, former CIA Director from 1993-1995. Although Woolsey was working for Booz Allen Hamilton during the Iraq War, the large government contractor was helping to manage the Department of Homeland Security, which was established by Bush in response to 9/11.
On September 12, 2016, Woolsey was named Donald Trump’s senior adviser on national security issues. Woolsey is infamous for a TV appearance he made only hours after 9/11 occurred, where he blamed Iraq for the attacks and called on the U.S. to invade the country, despite a lack of evidence indicating that Iraq was at fault. For years before 2001, Woolsey was an advocate for a “second war” in Iraq, too.
During an interview with CNN on Monday, Woolsey said he’s supporting Donald Trump because of the candidate’s plans to expand U.S. military spending.
When asked if he supports Trump’s belief that the U.S. should’ve taken over oil refineries during the Iraq War, Woolsey said it’s a good strategy in order “to undercut the power that accrues in those countries in the Middle East.”
Woolsey’s history as a proponent of invading Iraq, both with or without justifiable reasons, will likely not change anytime soon. Now that he is advising Trump on defense and intelligence, a Trump presidency could mean more American troops in Iraq.