Earliest Documentation on Iraq Planning?

[shraby]

Wed Aug 17th, 2005 at 13:20:43 PDT
This afternoon, the National Security Archives at George Washington University released some stunning documents, that seem to further corroborate the Downing Street Minutes, as well as buttress the argument that there was precious little post-war planning in the rush to topple Saddam. Among them is this State Department powerpoint slide:

(more)

<http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/8/17/162043/385>

[pauldavid]

1. Planning for post-Saddam regime change Oct 2001

I have been tying to post about this.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/index.html

State Department experts warned CENTCOM
before Iraq war about lack of plans for
post-war Iraq security

Planning for post-Saddam regime change began
as early as October 2001

Washington, D.C., August 17, 2005: Newly declassified State Department documents show that government experts warned the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) in early 2003 about "serious planning gaps for post-conflict public security and humanitarian assistance," well before Operation Iraqi Freedom began.

In a February 7, 2003, memo to Under Secretary of State Paula Dobriansky, three senior Department officials noted CENTCOM's "focus on its primary military objectives and its reluctance to take on 'policing' roles," but warned that "a failure to address short-term public security and humanitarian assistance concerns could result in serious human rights abuses which would undermine an otherwise successful military campaign, and our reputation internationally." The memo adds "We have raised these issues with top CENTCOM officials."

By contrast, a December 2003 report to Congress, also released by the State Department, offers a relatively rosy picture of the security situation, saying U.S. forces are "increasingly successful in preventing planned hostile attacks; and in capturing former regime loyalists, would-be terrorists and planners; and seizing weapons caches." The document acknowledges that "Challenges remain."

[MissMarple]

2. We were right, we know were right, all along re this.

But they don't care, it isn't about doing the right thing in the right way, it's all about bullying and lying to get their own way, whatever that may be, with whatever that will take. It is about the winning, and not for the United States, not for the American people, but for their own selfish, crass ends.

[killbotfactory]

3. PNACers have been "planning" this since the early-mid 90's

I use "planning" in the loosest form of the word, since it's obvious they didn't really have much of a plan at all, despite salivating at the thought of toppling Saddam.

[Burried News]

4. A story about Wolfowitz mentioned 1992, a year after 1st Gulf War

I would try alternet.org if it is important - PS I hope Fitz is one of the people who thinks it's important. :)

[Burried News]

5. Frontline Program - Rumsfeld's War

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/pentagon/etc/cronagon.html
You can toggle each person listed for their full statement. The Program was titled "Rumsfeld's War" because it covers far more than Iraq - it is his rise to power and the philosophy he brought with him.

If nothing else toggle the Full Statement of General Hoar and the one of General Rich. It was an outstanding program and in my view was a major reason why the Conservatives wanted to take over PBS - it is very damaging/revealing/damning

[Burried News]

6. Bingo 1992

http://www.scc.losrios.edu/~bodleyd/PNAC.html
"When the United States routed Saddam's occupying army from Kuwait in
March 1991, most aides - including Cheney - approved of the senior
Bush's decision to not push forward to Baghdad and oust Saddam.

Cheney asked at a May 1992 briefing: "How many additional American
lives is Saddam Hussein worth? And the answer I would give is not very
damn many."

Yet shortly before that, in February 1992, staffers for Wolfowitz - who
was deputy defense secretary under Cheney at the time - drafted an
American defense policy that called for the United States to
aggressively use its military might. The draft made no mention of a
role for the United Nations."