Priorities from hell

9/11 was atrocious. But it is puzzling how few people seem to think that the second invasion of Iraq was an inappropriate response. It wasn't as if the Iraqi goverment was working with Al Qaeda (see "Al Qaeda-Hussein link is dismissed"). And hasn't it been proven by now that there really are no Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq? (See "US calls off search for Iraqi WMDs".)

So, why did the US really invade Iraq?

In an article entitled "Ike was Right", Truthdig's Robert Scheer quotes from President Dwight D. Eisenhower's Farewell Address to the American Nation in 1961:

“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”

Robert Scheer points to this quotation as the fundamental reason why America invaded Iraq. It wasn't because of 9/11, he asserts - no-one has shown what Iraq had had to do with that. And a few weeks following the second American invasion of Iraq on 20 March 2003 it had already become clear that it wasn't because of the non-existent WMDs.

No, Scheer says, you should rather look at the dollar trail:

"A recent study by Nobel Prize-wining economist Joseph E. Stiglitz and Harvard University’s Linda Bilmes [estimated] the true cost of the Iraq adventure to U.S taxpayers at a whopping $2.267 trillion.

"The big prize here for Bush’s foreign policy is not the acquisition of natural resources or the enhancement of U.S. security, but rather the lining of the pockets of the defense contractors."

Until recently, Halliburton through its subsidiary, Kellogg, Brown and Root, was one of the biggest defense contractors in Iraq (it had been awarded a series of fat contracts for which it was not required to bid; so-called "no-bid" contracts). According to the Arms Trade Resource Center, these contracts (and added expenses, which Halliburton are never loathe to claim) amassed $8 billion and counting.

Do you remember the name of a former Halliburton CEO? Dick Cheney.

But wait, there's more: At least thirty-two top officials in the Bush Administration are reputed to have served as executives or paid consultants to major weapons contractors before
joining the Administration.

Besides Halliburton, it is claimed that companies that have benefited handsomely from the latest Iraq war include Chevron, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Bechtel. (The same company names and more are named here.)

Scheer concludes:

"As Eisenhower warned: “We should take nothing for granted; only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together. ... We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.”

Also see:

• Halliburton Watch
• Is what's good for Boeing and Halliburton good for America?
  
• The Ultimate Mistake
• The Halliburton Agenda
• How much are you making on the war, Daddy?
• The Iraq War and the Changing Face of Pentagon Contracting
• All Arms Trade Resource Center Reports