FORMER TREASURY SECRETARY PAUL ONEILL SAYS INVASION OF IRAQ WAS PLANNED IN THE FIRST DAYS...

Drudge ^ | 1/10/04 | Drudge

[joesbucks]

so this shows the Bush team took the Saddam threat seriously and was doing something about it earlier than we thought. that's good, not bad.

He may be both. Is he telling the truth?

[dpa5923]

Actually, a more accurate translation would be "Thou shall not commit murder."

There is a huge difference between murder and killing.

[ClintonBeGone]

Right on! Bush was so right to get rid of this traitor to his administration. The economy has done much better since he was forced out. Maybe CBS will employ him now. They love losers.

Surely Dan Rather will have him at the election desk on election night reporting with him the results.

[joesbucks]

O'Neill is not mentioning anything about this and trying to make it look like Bush cooked this whole thing up.

Whoa there partner. Remember, the Clinton adm wasn't smart enough to conger up plans that we as conservatives would support. Can't go there.

[joesbucks]

that Bush's plans on Iraq were practically a seamless continuation of Clinton's policy

Why suddenly is the Clinton administrations plans so dead on when they were so wrong while he was in office?

[shrinkermd]

A vain man's revenge. That is the easiest explanation for Paul O'Neill's behavior towards President Bush. It must not be easy to believe you are the center of the universe and find out you really have a boss.

[Zipporah]

If you read the link I posted.. within the letter it states: "In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. That now needs to become the aim of American foreign policy.

We urge you to articulate this aim, and to turn your Administration's attention to implementing a strategy for removing Saddam's regime from power. This will require a full complement of diplomatic, political and military efforts..".. and also notice who the signers are..

[new cruelty]

I agree.

[rightbanker]

Payback is an ugly thing. If O'Neil has decided he wants to bring Bush down, watch out.

What he does is:

(a) inflame the already angry RATS. The RATS will turn out in droves this year.

(b) make the dunderheads who have no ideology (the "moderates, the perpetually undecided, etc.) hesitate to plop down for Bush.

Especially coming from a former "insider" ( who was what fifth or sixth in the line of succession for the presidency) this could cause Bush just enough support among the dunderheads or cause enough of them to stay home that an enraged RAT base could carry this thing for the RAT candidate.

It all depends on if this is a one day/two day kind of thing or if there is continual drip drip drip of information to support O'Neil's allegations. If it's a one/two day kind of thing, it will have no effect whatsoever.

But it the Press blows this up into the major scandel of the year kind of thing, then it could have a significant effect -- especially on the dunderheads who sway elections in this country.

Combined enraged RATs with tuned out or turned off Dunderheards, with 1000 jobs in December, continuing casualties in Iraq, no WMD, and this looks like this might shape up to be at least less than a cakewalk.

[Miss Marple]

I believe it is the PENTAGON that is tasked with having contingency plans for invasions, not Bill Clinton. Those plans are done regardless of who is president. Clinton's policy against Iraq was our national policy, which is why we had sanctions and no-fly zones and the like.

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

There is a huge difference between murder and killing.

Yeah, I know. I was just throwing it out there because it was the first thing that popped into my head when I read Jim Noble's post #9.

Just being a pain.

[joesbucks]

Paul O'Neill was recommended by Cheney, who had known him through business dealings.

I don't think a background check is done for sour grapes potential, though.

Cheney made a mistake with this guy, obviously. People make mistakes.

And I do think if this book is the hit piece it sounds like, Mr. O'Neill will find that he has made a mistake as well.

Your points may be spot on. But what you haven't addressed is whether Nr. O'Neil's comments are correct. How many truthful whistle blowers have come forward only after a "sour grapes" incident occurred? Sour grapes can bring fabrications or stretches of the truth. Sour grapes can also shed light so the truth can be seen.

[MizSterious]

I do not blame VP Cheney for this hiring blunder. I blame the people who are supposed to thoroughly check the backgrounds of candidates for sensitive, high positions. I'm sure VP Cheney, like President Bush, relies on these background checks. If they are not properly done (and properly reported), the blame lies there. A guy like O'Neill must have a history of backstabbing and disloyalty--I doubt this is his first "hit."

[hedgie]

The plan was probably handed over from the Clinton Administration considering Clinton's determination that he had WMD's and we had bombed them with the British the last 2 years of his presidency, operation Desert Fox. Also, official US policy was that Regime Change was the policy when Bush Entered office IRAQ LIBERATION ACT. O'Neill is not mentioning anything about this and trying to make it look like Bush cooked this whole thing up.

Thank you

Incidentally, I think what's going on here is that O'Neill's flop as Treasury secretary has made it back to the country club. He has been getting ribbed in in the locker room and is now all pissy about it.

See Caddyshack for details.

[joesbucks]

I'm no Clinton fan, but having been a lurker on this forum for about a year, and active since 97, we were told anything and everything Clinton did was misdirected. Even his dep't of state and pentagon actions.

[mystery-ak]

This is his revenge...he didn't waste anytime writing this *book*...and surprise, he released it in an election year...yeah, right...this isn't revenge(saracasm).

[pttttt]

The firing was about a year ago. A few things to recall:

- O'Neill found he had differences with administration policy and began voicing them.

- An honorable man would have resigned, or not taken the job in the first place. Bush's policies weren't a secret.

- An honorable man wouldn't wait a year and begin attacking the administration that gave him a chance to serve (but heading into the elections might be good for book sales).

- He was hired because he was a Cheney bud. In fact, Cheney insisted on it. Those need to be looked at more carefully.

The speech impediment isn't the main problem; the man says stupid, out-of-place things and leads with his ego. Now he's mad because he's not the center of attention. After this book, he can retire to the obscurity he so richly deserves. Unless he's prosecuted for publishing classified information, which maybe he should be.

[joesbucks]

A guy like O'Neill must have a history of backstabbing and disloyalty--I doubt this is his first "hit."

Is it backstabbing and disloyality IF it is factual?

[Rome2000]

So the Bush Adminsitration had contingency plans to invade Iraq.

And the Clinton Administration didn't?

O'Neil is a complete moron

[beezdotcom]

It's probably less about his grudge, and more about trying to sell his new book. Follow the money.