Except Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and everyone knew it, including Bush, and all they had to do was have the British invent a fake paper claiming WMDs.
So that's all it took to invade Iraq.
Yet you think 9/11 was this huge elaborate setup to... invade Afghanistan, a pissant nation with no value?
Iraq was absolutely sold off of 9/11. Just because that didn’t end up being the formal reason doesn’t mean they didn’t channel the national desire to strike back at something into that war.
As for Afghanistan having no value—the actual players don’t matter. All that matters for the contractors who make money off of the conflict is that it exists. Same for the money laundering that happens with the decades of nation-building after we “win” the right to pour money into a shithole. It could have been literally anywhere, all they needed was a big hole in the shape of a war to dump cash in.
So literally hundreds of people were involved in a plot of mass-murder, not one person leaked, and they were happy to do so so Raytheon could sell new radar systems?
Oh, I'm not trying to take a position on that—I haven't looked into the claims enough—I'm just saying that it was definitely helpful in selling it to the American public, and hypothetically that motive is valid.
I'm objecting to your logic that Afghanistan was worthless and Iraq was irrelevant, not necessarily your conclusion that the Bush admin being involved is unlikely.
Except Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and everyone knew it, including Bush, and all they had to do was have the British invent a fake paper claiming WMDs.
So that's all it took to invade Iraq.
Yet you think 9/11 was this huge elaborate setup to... invade Afghanistan, a pissant nation with no value?
Iraq was absolutely sold off of 9/11. Just because that didn’t end up being the formal reason doesn’t mean they didn’t channel the national desire to strike back at something into that war.
As for Afghanistan having no value—the actual players don’t matter. All that matters for the contractors who make money off of the conflict is that it exists. Same for the money laundering that happens with the decades of nation-building after we “win” the right to pour money into a shithole. It could have been literally anywhere, all they needed was a big hole in the shape of a war to dump cash in.
"channel the National desire to strike back at something"
That was Afghanistan, not Iraq. Any supposed connection of Iraq to 911 was bs, trying to sell the public on war.
The original claim re: WMD was Saddam would not hesitate to use it, if he had it. And he had with poison gas. That much was reasonable.
Saddam violated the terms of his cease fire agreement. No further justification was needed.
So literally hundreds of people were involved in a plot of mass-murder, not one person leaked, and they were happy to do so so Raytheon could sell new radar systems?
Uh huh.
Oh, I'm not trying to take a position on that—I haven't looked into the claims enough—I'm just saying that it was definitely helpful in selling it to the American public, and hypothetically that motive is valid.
I'm objecting to your logic that Afghanistan was worthless and Iraq was irrelevant, not necessarily your conclusion that the Bush admin being involved is unlikely.
You jumped from Iraq to Afghanistan. Why?
How much more disingenuous could you be?
Nevermind, I don't want to find out. You're a disgusting, vile creature.
Because we invaded Afghanistan first, two years prior, you daughter-raping shit-eater.
2 years difference, that you just glossed over.