A
Question for George Tenet
by Karen
Kwiatkowski
by Karen Kwiatkowski
DIGG THIS
I watched Sunday
night as George Tenet promoted
his new book on 60 Minutes. Tenet protested his innocence,
and maintained his steadfast lack of complicity in Bush’s road to
war in Iraq.
I was amazed
at the sophisticated and hard-hitting questions thrown Tenet’s way
by CBS, now four long years after the invasion of Iraq. Well over
three thousand American soldiers, Marines, and contractors are dead,
tens of thousands more damaged beyond all recognition. Untold hundreds
of thousands of Iraqis are dead, maimed, and traumatized. Millions
of Iraqis live as impoverished tenants in their own country or refugees
elsewhere, and this number grows daily on both sides.
How nice it
must be for everyone involved. A clean studio, the sober semblance
of mainstream media curiosity, just the right note of moral outrage,
and a former Bush insider spilling the beans – what more could CBS
or any of the rest of us ask for?
Each new day
seems to bring us one more whining Washingtonian. As an insider
witness to the moral depravity that led to the lie-based invasion
and the illegal and murderous occupation, I have a simple question
for George Tenet.
I won’t ask
him about his performance as Central Intelligence Puppy Dog. He’s
presumably explained that in his book.
I won’t ask
him about the Medal of Freedom he accepted not long ago, although
what
he ought to do about that is a good question.
I won’t ask
him about who leaked his "slam dunk" comment "out
of context." I mean, seriously, people! He was just talking
about the only thing left to do in 2002 – sell the public on the
upcoming regime change in Iraq. That sale was easy, it was a slam
dunk and Tenet was right. On the question of the leak of the "slam
dunk" phraseology to Bob Woodward, it was clear from the interview
that Tenet thinks this particular knife came from Cheney’s office.
Modus operandi, and all that.
Instead, I
have a very simple question. Why are we in Iraq? Tenet made it clear
that no debate ever occurred on whether the United States of American
should invade and occupy Iraq – at least not with the Director of
Central Intelligence in attendance. Instead, as so many others have
reported, revealed, and witnessed – the decision to "do"
Iraq had long been made. In 2001? In 2000? In 1998? In 1991?
The questions
debated by the administration in late 2001 and 2002 were only about
when and how to sell the story to a frightened flock of American
sheep. The forcible rape of Iraq was, according to the second-longest
serving CIA Director, already scheduled.
Am I to believe
that Tenet – presumably in the know on all things intelligence,
the go-to boy on national security, the man about town loved by
both Republicans and Democrats under Clinton and Bush – this guy
doesn’t know why we are in Iraq?
I want to know.
I have my theories, as do most people. I don’t believe we destroyed
a secular Arab country along with our army, our global reputation
and our honor because Dubya wanted a) to vindicate his father, or
conversely; b) to show Pop what he was made of.
I don’t know
how much of our actions on Iraq were influenced by Foreign Country
A, or B, or even C. Israelis and Saudis, or even the Pakistan military
might have their reasons, I suppose – but unless they were gambling
on chaos and fickleness, or just love a percolating disaster next
door, it seems they were mainly cheerleading their friends in Washington,
rather than leading them. In any case, it would be nice if Tenet
would clear that up for the rest of us.
I don’t know
how much of this is related Christian premillennial dispensationalism.
I’d sure like to find out.
I’m pretty
sure freedom and democracy had little to do with the invasion or
occupation of Iraq. Our most reliable regional allies are despots,
dictatorships, or militaristic socialist states, as Iraq had once
been.
None of the
above makes sense to me – but I’d like George Tenet’s help and gentle
correction, now that he is speaking freely.
I think the
invasion and occupation of Iraq – at its heart – was and remains
institutionally supported because it allows all of the key governing
bodies in the United States (including the Congress) to reallocate
and confiscate more of the national treasury, and to build more
military bases around the world. Certainly that has happened, and
I don’t hear a loud unified demand from the Congress or anywhere
else saying return the money to the taxpayer, and close the American
bases in Iraq immediately and permanently.
I think it
was timely in light of the circa 2000 euro-based Iraqi oil economy,
and the imminent relaxation or cancellation of trade sanctions.
While arguably heavy-handed and stupid, invasion provided a face-saving
way to ensure US-beholden companies could play with a major advantage
in a post-sanction Iraq, and to ensure Iraq’s reversal back to a
dollar-based economy. This explanation also has real beneficiaries,
all of whom (Congress, establishmentarians including the New
York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal
editorial pages and most of the Washington thinktanks) actively
support the occupation even as they grow bored with the continued
death and destruction.
I also think
there are frightened men in Washington with conflicted identities
who believe playing war while wearing fine cloth and nibbling the
lightest of soufflés will somehow make them manly, admired,
virile, and powerful.
So Mr. Tenet,
you’re looking good these days. One question, sir! Why are we in
Iraq?
May
2, 2007
LRC
columnist Karen Kwiatkowski, Ph.D. [send
her mail], a retired USAF lieutenant colonel, has written on
defense issues with a libertarian perspective for MilitaryWeek.com,
hosted the call-in radio show American
Forum, and blogs occasionally for Huffingtonpost.com
and Liberty and Power.
Archives of her American Forum radio program can be accessed here
and here. To receive
automatic announcements of new articles, click
here.
Copyright ©
2007 Karen Kwiatkowski
Karen
Kwiatkowski Archives
|