|
Bush moves ahead with world war plans { March 19 2003 } Original Source Link: (May no longer be active)
http://dc.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=74258&group=webcasthttp://dc.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=74258&group=webcast
Bush Moves Ahead with a Plan for World War
by Gregg Mosson 10:48am Wed Jun 25 '03 (Modified on 1:03pm Thu Jun 26 '03)
address: Washington D.C.
When ex-CIA director James Woosley spoke at Columbia University on Feb. 15, 2003, he stated the U.S. attack on Iraq would be the beginning of a planned “World War 4,” and in recent months Bush officials have looked beyond Iraq to threaten Iran, North Korea, and Syria.
When ex-CIA director James Woosley spoke at Columbia University on Feb. 15, 2003, he stated the U.S. attack on Iraq would be the beginning of a planned “World War 4” (1), and Bush administration pronouncements since the Iraq invasion show that the U.S. is threatening and possibly planning war in simultaneous international locations. In recent months Bush officials have threatened Iran, North Korea, and Syria on top of current military engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan, all the while pursuing unprecedented military spending increases in the U.S. Congress. Woosley himself is a current member of the Defense Policy Board that advises Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and so his remarks cannot be interpreted as that of a lone wolf. In fact, fellow board members include GOP luminaries such as former House speaker Newt Gingrich, Ex-California governor Pete Wilson, AEI fellow Richard Perle, Ex-Vice President Dan Quayle, and Henry Kissinger, among others(2). Unfortunately, Woosley is likely serious.
Woosley remarked that Iran, Syria, and Libya will be targeted next by the Bush Administration, and within days of the March 19, 2003, start of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld threatened Iran and Syria (3,4). Rumsfeld accused both Syria and Iran of aiding the Iraq government and warned that the U.S. “will hold the Syrian government accountable.” Just two months later in May, The Washington Post reported that the Bush administration is contemplating a covert war against Iran to disrupt and topple the Iranian government from the inside (5). It is possible Bush could order such a war of destabilization without Congressional approval because it would not be an overt military action. It is possible he already has.
On June 12, Rumsfeld labeled Iran a “nexus of terror and weapons of mass destruction”(6), citing the same claims the Bush administration cited against Iraq before invading that country. Yet, as with Iraq, the Bush administration has not linked the Iranian government with the terrorists of Sept. 11, 2001. Nor did President Bush as a presidential candidate ever speak of the pressing need to stop an Iranian nuclear program, a program that could not have been hatched overnight.
Defense Policy Board member and ex-Chairman Richard Perle said the same week that a U.S. preventive strike against North Korea’s nuclear reactor cannot be ruled out (7), an action that could spark a U.S.-North Korean war. Considering America’s involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Bush administration’s plans of confrontation are global in scope. And these plans seem not based on international cooperation, but on international threats and war.
Backing all this is the Bush administration’s plan for the largest U.S. military build-up in U.S. history: Bush plans to boost Defense Department spending to $441 billion in fiscal 2008, which would mean a $150 billion rise since Bush came into office, according to the White House’s own numbers (8). This eight-year increase surpasses Ronald Reagan’s eight-year Cold War build-up of $141 billion (9). So the question is, for what is Bush preparing?
But first, let’s place this build-up in perspective. After the height of the Cold War, Defense Department spending fell over 12 years by an aggregate $3 billion, from Ronald Reagan’s last budget to William Clinton’s last budget. This even-keel lasted until Bush’s first year in office when the Defense budget rose by $40 billion dollars alone (10).
The ascension continues. Bush raised Defense Department spending by $26 billion the following year, and his proposed $379 billion Defense Department budget for 2004 (11) represents a $86 billion increase during three years in office. In contrast, in 1970 during the U.S.-Vietnam war, the Defense Department in total was budgeted at $80.123 billion (12). The Bush Presidency represents a massive militarization of the U.S. government.
And Bush seems intent on using it.
Footnotes:
1. Woosley’s speech was broadcast on CSPAN on Feb. 15, 2003
2. The Center for Public Integrity in Washington D.C. [http://www.public-i.org/dtaweb/report.asp?ReportID=514&L1=10&L2=10&L3=0&L4=0&L5=0]
3. I date the war starting with the cruise missile strike against Saddam Hussein and President Bush’s televised ‘War Address,’ March 19, 2003.
4. The Washington Times, “Rumsfeld Warns Syria, Iran,” March, 29, 2003: A1.
5. The Washington Post, “U.S. Pressure Feeds Iran’s Internal Debate,” May 29, 2003: A1.
6. The New York Times, “Rumsfeld Says Iran Is Developing Nuclear Arms Under Guise of Civilian Program,” June 12, 2003: A16.
7. Reuters, “Can't Rule Out N. Korea Strike, Perle Says,” Jim Wolf, June 11, 2003: Online. [http://asia.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=2915624]
8. “Fiscal Year 2004 Historical Tables: Table 4.1: Outlays by Agency 1962-2008.” U.S. Office of Budget and Management, Online. [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2004/pdf/hist.pdf]
9. Ibid
10. Ibid
11. “Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal 2004,” OMB Online. [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2004/]
12. “Fiscal Year 2004 Historical Tables: Table 4.1: Outlays by Agency 1962-2008.”
|
|
