You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Israel urged US to attack Iran - not Iraq
2007-08-31
WASHINGTON - Israeli officials warned the George W Bush administration that an invasion of Iraq would be destabilizing to the region and urged the United States instead to target Iran as the primary enemy, according to former Bush administration official Lawrence Wilkerson.
Don't know how you could 'target' Iran in 2002 while leaving Saddam sitting next door. That would be an open invitation to Sammy.
Wilkerson, then a member of the US State Department's policy planning staff and later chief of staff for secretary of state Colin Powell, recalled in an interview that the Israelis reacted immediately to indications that the Bush administration was thinking of war against Iraq. After the Israeli government picked up the first signs of that intention, said Wilkerson, "The Israelis were telling us Iraq is not the enemy - Iran is the enemy."
Iran is certainly their enemy, and in 2002 they clearly saw that Iran was more of a threat to them than a defanged Saddam.
Wilkerson describes the Israeli message to the Bush administration in early 2002 as being, "If you are going to destabilize the balance of power, do it against the main enemy."

The warning against an invasion of Iraq was "pervasive" in Israeli communications with the US administration, Wilkerson recalled. It was conveyed to the administration by a wide range of Israeli sources, including political figures, intelligence, and private citizens. Wilkerson noted that the main point of their communications was not that the US should immediately attack Iran, but that "it should not be distracted by Iraq and Saddam Hussein" from a focus on the threat from Iran.
Posted by:Claiger Jomomble6619

#12  The entire Middle East needs to be picked up and shaken like a carpet. Iraq was merely the easist corner to grab onto.

Works for me but Iran still has to go no matter what.
Posted by: Zenster   2007-08-31 20:02  

#11  But I have a grasp on reality too.

Hardly. lol.
Posted by: Lumpy Uloque2135   2007-08-31 16:05  

#10  If there was any justice in the world, Saudi Arabia would have been first pick for a housecleaning. Iran would make a fine second choice. In the meantime, there were a half dozen reasons to whack Saddam.

Anyone who has ever played chess or go realises you need to make some preliminary moves to get where you want to finally end up. The entire Middle East needs to be picked up and shaken like a carpet. Iraq was merely the easist corner to grab onto.
Posted by: SteveS   2007-08-31 14:47  

#9  Ed, we'll make your our first ambassador to the Republic of Eastern Arabia, a 50 km-wide strip of sand ...
Posted by: Steve White   2007-08-31 11:40  

#8  Pappy, I think these people think there's a warm water port at Kandahar. Or still think Afghanistan was more involved in 9/11 than Pakistan...
Posted by: Abdominal Snowman   2007-08-31 11:03  

#7  Iran would have been a better choice than this welfare war in either Iraq or Afghanistan. Even better would have have to destroy and annex the locus of Sunni terrorist ideology and financing. Did I mention the 12M barrels/day of sweet, sweet oil thrown in for free?

And I'd like a Bentley, Angie Harmon, and to win the Masters tournament. But I have a grasp on reality too.
Posted by: Pappy   2007-08-31 10:37  

#6  In a way it's a good sign---the opponents of war with Iran taking out their haviest artillery ("it's all a Jewish conspiracy" is one of the most influential arguments there are---there's nothing that you cannot make most Gentiles do if you convince them the opposite is a Jewish conspiracy [I wonder how the global wormers missed that?]).
Posted by: gromgoru   2007-08-31 09:17  

#5  Mebbe Israel should go to war with Iran instead of oh, say, Hezbullah.

Not that Israel didn't have an extremely valid point, but I bet they know first hand that going to war with Iran is easier said than done.
Posted by: Mike N.   2007-08-31 08:35  

#4  There was decent public support, both inside the US and worldwide, for the action in Afghanistan following 9-11. There was reasonable legal justification and significant public support for the action to remove Hussein and WMD from Iraq.
There was not, and indeed still is not, legal rationale for acting against the MM, even though Israel was correct in calling them the bigger enemy. You go to war against the enemy you can, not the one you wish you could.
Posted by: Glenmore   2007-08-31 07:20  

#3  Iran would have been a better choice than this welfare war in either Iraq or Afghanistan. Even better would have have to destroy and annex the locus of Sunni terrorist ideology and financing. Did I mention the 12M barrels/day of sweet, sweet oil thrown in for free?
Posted by: ed   2007-08-31 06:55  

#2  There's still time to do Iran too.
Posted by: Iblis   2007-08-31 02:24  

#1  Feel free to miss any pertinent information since you are hell bent on reporting half truths.
Posted by: newc   2007-08-31 00:17  

00:00