Why did Karl Rove make this extremely clear statement of our objectives in Iraq this week, when we’ve heard nothing but Iraqi Freedom this and War on Terror that for five years?
"… the creation of the democracy in the historic center of the Middle East with the third-largest oil reserves in the world. If we have a functioning democracy in Iraq, that’s an ally in the war on terror, a counterweight to mullahs Iran and to Assad in Syria, this will create a very hopeful center of reform and energy for reform throughout the Middle East."
We know that they had this objective from long before the 9/11 attack from many sources, not the least being a letter they sent to President Clinton in January 1998 that’s still proudly displayed on the Project for the New American Century‘s web site:
We are writing you because we are convinced that current American policy toward Iraq is not succeeding, and that we may soon face a threat in the Middle East more serious than any we have known since the end of the Cold War. In your upcoming State of the Union Address, you have an opportunity to chart a clear and determined course for meeting this threat. We urge you to seize that opportunity, and to enunciate a new strategy that would secure the interests of the U.S. and our friends and allies around the world. That strategy should aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power. We stand ready to offer our full support in this difficult but necessary endeavor.…Given the magnitude of the threat, the current policy, which depends for its success upon the steadfastness of our coalition partners and upon the cooperation of Saddam Hussein, is dangerously inadequate. The only acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility that Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction. In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake military action as diplomacy is clearly failing. In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. That now needs to become the aim of American foreign policy.
We can presume why they haven’t been willing to give their real reasons out loud – though by now, everyone in the world knows them. So, why, on an eveyday O’Reilly show, would Karl Rove, no longer on their team on paper, finally say exactly what the plan has been all along. Some possibilities:
-
It means nothing. He just said it because it’s what he was thinking about that day when talking to Bill O’reilly.
-
It means that Karl Rove has a guilty conscience and wants to unburden himself with straight talk.
-
It means, among other things, that Karl Rove is still in the game, working for the Man.
-
It means they want to give McCain something to run on that isn’t ridiculous.
-
It means they are worried that Obama will become President and put an end to their war.
-
It means that they want to get the truth into the discourse in hopes we will think it was always out there.
-
It means they think they can rally their constituents to lobby to keep the war going.
I rule out 1. and 2. without discussion. All of the rest seem plausible. I pick 3. thru 7. Final answer…
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.