The dots have been connected and it is now clear that Dick Cheney ordered torture to obtain confessions that would forge false links between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's Iraq. He also ordered the outing of a undercover CIA agent, Valerie Plame, after her husband disclosed that the Bush/Cheney 16 words about Iraq obtaining nuclear materials were completely ludicrous. So he crossed the lines of treason, the ethical treatment of prisoners, and sent our troops to fight and die for a pointless war and lied to congress and the American people about why.
Fast forward seven years and now we hear about how Bush/Cheney kept America safe for seven years.
I want to connect the dots after the jump.
All of these actions were to justify the invasion of Iraq. That is clear. There are several recommended diaries about that. What we don't know, and what hasn't been discussed is why Bush/Cheney were intent on invading Iraq. I would argue that the Iraq war was simply a diversion to cover up the extreme incompetence that allowed Al Qaeda to successfully attack the US in September 2001.
Al Qaeda was well known to be a threat in the late '90's. They had successfully attacked our embassies and our Navy ships. During the Clinton years, we developed an anti-terrorism strategy led by Richard Clarke. As we all know, in August 2001, there were strong warning from the CIA that "Bin Laden determined to strike within the US". No meeting of the principles of the National Security council occurred from Jan 20, 2001 until Sept 9, two days before 9/11, even though our anti-terrorism czar was clamoring for one.
This was a massive failing of the Bush White House. They were scrambling. They needed to distract the very distractible American people from asking the questions about how we let our defenses down. By ginning up a battle that they mistakenly thought could be easily won, they thought they could focus on a "success" rather than their massive failure. The only thing they got right - and it was their main objective - was they distracted the American people from blaming them for allowing 9/11 to occur.
What are the other explanations? Retribution for an assassination attempt on George HW Bush? Making lots of money for Halliburton? Strengthening Iran's position in the region? No, none of these explanations hold water. They were covering their massive failure. Looked at in this light, it does make one wonder about the anthrax attacks as well (OK you can take off your tin foil hat now).