--- Begin Message ---
-Caveat Lector-
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
<FONT COLOR="#000099">4 DVDs Free +s&p Join Now
</FONT><A HREF="http://us.click.yahoo.com/pt6YBB/NXiEAA/Ey.GAA/zgSolB/TM";><B>Click
Here!</B></A>
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
>From the Rumor Mill News Reading Room
http://www.rumormillnews.com
Eagleburger scared to death of Perles, Wolfawitzes
Posted By: Rosalinda
Date: Tuesday, 20 August 2002, 10:21 p.m.
[source: Fox News Sunday, Aug. 18, 2002]
"I'M SCARED TO DEATH THAT THE RICHARD PERLES AND WOLFOWITZES
OF THIS WORLD ARE ARGUING WE CAN DO IT IN A CAKEWALK," said
former Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger about the
neo-cons' plans to overthrow Saddam Hussein,
"when I think it will take some hundreds of thousands of troops,
at least, to be sure that we can do it correctly,
and we haven't seen any reserves called up."
Eagleburger said that regime change is a legitimate aim of
American policy in Iraq, but only under certain circumstances.
"I don't think it's legitimate policy at this stage, unless the
President can demonstrate to all of us that Saddam has his finger
on a nuclear or biological or chemical trigger, and he's about to
use it," Eagleburger said. "I believe that sooner or later we're
going to have to deal with Saddam Hussein because of his general
reputation, because of what I'm convinced he's done with regard
to terrorism and the support thereof, but I'm not at all sure I
believe that it has to be right now."
Eagleburger said that the Bush Administration has not
demonstrated that "they have really thought through what it's
going to take to overthrow him... or what we do when we overthrow
him." He also cited the problems with the allies,
and said he agreed with Brent Scowcroft
that it would foul up the war on terrorism.
If the President were to lay out the reasons, and what would
be done afterwards, etc., Eagleburger said he would accept it,
but, he added, "it doesn't seem to me we can do it on the basis
of what the Richard Perles and the Wolfowitzes say, which is this
can be done in a cake walk, and we've got all of these wonderful
insurgents out here who will be able to govern
immediately after we succeed."
Host Tony Snow pointed out that "this is the second time
you've mentioned Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz," and he asked,
"Do you think they're naive?"
"No, I don't think they're naive," Eagleburger answered.
"I must tell you I think they're devious,
and I think they have had for some time this view that...
well, first of all, I think they are committed to getting rid,
nd have been for years, committed to getting rid of Saddam
Hussein, because they think we should have done it the first
time around. And secondly, I think they have convinced
themselves that it would be done on the cheap
by using these rebels, if you will,
these people who are anti-Saddam Iraqis,
I think there are at least six of them; and the point is,
I have no idea whether they can be used or not,
whether they are real people or not,
and whether they would succeed or not,
and I don't think there's any evidence one way or the other.
I am scared to death that they are going to convince the President
that they can do this, overthrow Saddam on the cheap,
and we'll find ourselves in the middle of a swamp,
because we didn't plan to do it in the right way."
[source: Fox News Sunday, Aug. 18, 2002]
SCOWCROFT DID IT ON HIS OWN, SAYS EAGLEBURGER. When he was
asked if Brent Scowcroft's views reflect those of President
Bush's father, the first President Bush, Eagleburger answered:
"I heard yesterday somebody saying that they thought this
was the former President Bush putting Brent up to this. I don't
believe that. I believe this was Scowcroft on his own. I do not
believe that this is something that he even talked to the former
President about, nor do I believe that if he had talked to the
former President about it, that the former President would have
said, `Brent, would you please do this for me.' I have no doubt
in my own mind, that this is a Scowcroft view, and that the
former President had nothing to do with it at all."
Eagleburger pointed out this this was not the first time
Scowcroft had said not to attack Iraq. "And so why he did it
again, I think, is because of all of this furor that's developed
over the last few weeks and last month or so about it, because of
all of the blathering that's gone on from various people within
the administration on various subjects related to going after
Iraq. And I think what Brent finally decided he had to do was to
voice his view again, but he has said it before."
[source: Reuters, Aug. 18]
U.S. DOESN'T NEED ALLIES, SAYS PERLE. "Our European allies
are just not relevant to this," said Richard Perle on ABC
television on Sunday Aug. 18. "And the one of some importance,
the United Kingdom, is, I believe, going to be with us."
"The rest of the Europeans prefer to look the other way, or
cut deals with Saddam, or buy him off in various ways," Perle said.
[source: NBC "Meet the Press," Aug. 18]
KISSINGER DISAGREES WITH SCOWCROFT. In an interview on NBC's
"Meet the Press" on Aug. 18, Henry Kissinger said, regarding
Brent Scowcroft's opposition to an attack on Iraq, "I disagree
with his analysis. I don't know what specific counterterrorism
acts are going to be prevented by action against Iraq that, to be
sure, should be well prepared and well thought out."
Kissinger then made the following imperial threat: "I would
in fact make the contrary argument. What is important in that
region to get across is that people who challenge the United
States and the international order by their behavior suffer
grievous and unacceptable consequences. And therefore I believe
when the smoke clears in a well conducted operation the
counterterrorism campaign will be strengthened."
[source: Wall Street Journal editorial, Aug. 19]
SCOWCROFT IS A KISSINGERIAN, BUT KISSINGER NO LONGER IS,
SAYS WALL STREET JOURNAL. In an editorial entitled, "This is
Opposition?" the editors of the Wall Street Journal claim there
is no revolt against Bush's foreign policy in the Republican
Party. The editors dismiss Dick Armey as a libertarian, and Chuck
Hagel as a headline-grabber, and then they pat themselves on the
back for having offered Brent Scowcroft a forum, so that he could
put his views on the record.
Scowcroft's view is that of realism, says the Journal,
describing this view as striving for a balance of power, and
resisting a foreign policy based on strong moral principles or
expanding U.S. principles and democracy. The State Department is
the home of this {Realpolitik}, which dominated Bush I, but not
the Reagan years, and is now losing out under Bush II. The
leading spokesman for this {Realpolitik} used to be Henry
Kissinger, says the Journal, who has now moved beyond it, while
Scowcroft remains mired in this outdated view.
[Source: WaPo Aug 19 op-ed, "Foreign Policy Infight...," by
Morton Abramowitz]
FOREIGN POLICY INFIGHTING IN THIS ADMINISTRATION RIVALS THE
WRANGLING OF SHULTZ, WEINBERGER, AND CASEY UNDER REAGAN, writes
long-time former U.S. diplomat, Carnegie Foundation fellow and
International Crisis Group Acting President Morton Abramowitz.
"Then, the hostilities often seemed more personal than
ideological. Casey, for example, even persisted in trying to get
Shultz fired.
"As far as one can tell, this adminstration's foreign policy
wars are more over ideology -- the way the world works, how to
confront it and what specifically needs to be done -- than
personality. And the differences between the top team seem to
stretch over major issues -- from Iraq to Afghanistan to China,
from the Arab-Israeli issue to North Korea, from alliance
management to public diplomacy. Our Middle East policy appears
to be one recent notable casualty of internal warfare.
"But there is a worse aspect in today's wars. In the Reagan
years, the animosities and the battles mostly stayed at the
top.... That, regrettable to say, is not the case now. The war
is fought daily in the high-level bureaucratic trenches; ideology
is very much in play. And that infighting has accentuated stasis
or inconsistencies in both policies and rhetoric."
Abramowitz hopes that Bush "will return from his vacation
determined to arrest drift and knock a few heads,
high up or a little lower down."
In the course of his review, Abramowitz notes that "Our
forces are fighting in one difficult place -- Afghanistan -- and
American control of that country is unravelling."
Messages In This Thread
NEW: Eagleburger scared to death of Perles, Wolfawitzes (views: 229)
Rosalinda -- Tuesday, 20 August 2002, 10:21 p.m.
NEW: PROOF THE BIG BOYS READ RUMOR MILL NEWS (views: 6)
X -- Wednesday, 21 August 2002, 1:00 a.m.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
To Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RMNews, The Uncensored National Rumor
http://www.rumormillnews.com
THE ONLY RUMOR YOU CAN TRUST
RUMOR MILL NEWS AGENCY
P.O. BOX 1994
FREEDOM, CA 95019
TEL/FAX 831 722 1221
WHY WAS PRINCESS DIANA MURDERED?
http://www.dianaqueenofheaven.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
<A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
--- End Message ---
