The Clipboard The Clipboard: The Real News in the Downing Street Memos

Al-Muhajabah's Islamic Blogs Home
« Iraq May Be Prime Place for Training of Militants | The Clipboard archives | Pentagon Creating Student Database »
Trackbacks (1 in, 0 out) | 

Email this link | Print this article | RDF

Further Reading | Elsewhere | Search Options
Add this entry to your hotlist (View your hotlist)

The Real News in the Downing Street Memos

Date: June 23, 2005 | 16 Jumada al-Awwal 1426 Hijriah

From an article1:

Put simply, U.S. aircraft patrolling the southern no-fly zone were dropping a lot more bombs in the hope of provoking a reaction that would give the allies an excuse to carry out a full-scale bombing campaign, an air war, the first stage of the conflict.

British government figures for the number of bombs dropped on southern Iraq in 2002 show that although virtually none were used in March and April, an average of 10 tons a month were dropped between May and August.

But these initial "spikes of activity" didn't have the desired effect. The Iraqis didn't retaliate. They didn't provide the excuse Bush and Blair needed. So at the end of August, the allies dramatically intensified the bombing into what was effectively the initial air war.

The number of bombs dropped on southern Iraq by allied aircraft shot up to 54.6 tons in September alone, with the increased rates continuing into 2003.

In other words, Bush and Blair began their war not in March 2003, as everyone believed, but at the end of August 2002, six weeks before Congress approved military action against Iraq.

The way in which the intelligence was "fixed" to justify war is old news.

The real news is the shady April 2002 deal to go to war, the cynical use of the U.N. to provide an excuse, and the secret, illegal air war without the backing of Congress.
(link)

By Michael Smith, the British Woodward and Bernstein. He also reveals that there are two Deep Throats. One source gave him the six memos and another the original Downing Street Memo (the minutes) and briefing paper. Read the whole thing.

Complete text of the article, The Real News in the Downing Street Memos, by Michael Smith

It is now nine months since I obtained the first of the "Downing Street memos," thrust into my hand by someone who asked me to meet him in a quiet watering hole in London for what I imagined would just be a friendly drink.
At the time, I was defense correspondent of the London Daily Telegraph, and a staunch supporter of the decision to oust Saddam Hussein. The source was a friend. He'd given me a few stories before but nothing nearly as interesting as this.

The six leaked documents I took away with me that night were to change completely my opinion of the decision to go to war and the honesty of Prime Minister Tony Blair and President Bush.

They focused on the period leading up to the Crawford, Texas, summit between Blair and Bush in early April 2002, and were most striking for the way in which British officials warned the prime minister, with remarkable prescience, what a mess post-war Iraq would become. Even by the cynical standards of realpolitik, the decision to overrule this expert advice seemed to be criminal.

The second batch of leaks arrived in the middle of this year's British general election, by which time I was writing for a different newspaper, the Sunday Times. These documents, which came from a different source, related to a crucial meeting of Blair's war Cabinet on July 23, 2002. The timing of the leak was significant, with Blair clearly in electoral difficulties because of an unpopular war.

I did not then regard the now-infamous memo — the one that includes the minutes of the July 23 meeting — as the most important. My main article focused on the separate briefing paper for those taking part, prepared beforehand by Cabinet Office experts.

It said that Blair agreed at Crawford that "the UK would support military action to bring about regime change." Because this was illegal, the officials noted, it was "necessary to create the conditions in which we could legally support military action."

But Downing Street had a "clever" plan that it hoped would trap Hussein into giving the allies the excuse they needed to go to war. It would persuade the U.N. Security Council to give the Iraqi leader an ultimatum to let in the weapons inspectors.

Although Blair and Bush still insist the decision to go to the U.N. was about averting war, one memo states that it was, in fact, about "wrong-footing" Hussein into giving them a legal justification for war.

British officials hoped the ultimatum could be framed in words that would be so unacceptable to Hussein that he would reject it outright. But they were far from certain this would work, so there was also a Plan B.

American media coverage of the Downing Street memo has largely focused on the assertion by Sir Richard Dearlove, head of British foreign intelligence, that war was seen as inevitable in Washington, where "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."

But another part of the memo is arguably more important. It quotes British Defense Secretary Geoff Hoon as saying that "the U.S. had already begun 'spikes of activity' to put pressure on the regime." This we now realize was Plan B.

Put simply, U.S. aircraft patrolling the southern no-fly zone were dropping a lot more bombs in the hope of provoking a reaction that would give the allies an excuse to carry out a full-scale bombing campaign, an air war, the first stage of the conflict.

British government figures for the number of bombs dropped on southern Iraq in 2002 show that although virtually none were used in March and April, an average of 10 tons a month were dropped between May and August.

But these initial "spikes of activity" didn't have the desired effect. The Iraqis didn't retaliate. They didn't provide the excuse Bush and Blair needed. So at the end of August, the allies dramatically intensified the bombing into what was effectively the initial air war.

The number of bombs dropped on southern Iraq by allied aircraft shot up to 54.6 tons in September alone, with the increased rates continuing into 2003.

In other words, Bush and Blair began their war not in March 2003, as everyone believed, but at the end of August 2002, six weeks before Congress approved military action against Iraq.

The way in which the intelligence was "fixed" to justify war is old news.

The real news is the shady April 2002 deal to go to war, the cynical use of the U.N. to provide an excuse, and the secret, illegal air war without the backing of Congress.

reference=http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0623-25.htm
~ Posted by Al-Muhajabah, a fair and balanced niqabi, at 08:33 PM

Trackbacks

What is trackback?
You Pinged Me

Here's who's pinging me:

RSS feed of trackbacks to this entry

Note: The links in the "You pinged me" section are generated automatically as a way of showing who is linking to me. Display of these links does not constitute endorsement of the content of those sites.


Further reading

Recent entries

The following is a list of the ten most recent entries in The Clipboard as of Mar 15, 2006:

View a list of all entries in The Clipboard

Related entries

This entry has been tagged as covering the following subjects: britain iraq intelligence deception war. The following is a list of the ten most recent entries in Al-Muhajabah's Islamic Blogs that share any of these tags:

A semantic analysis of this entry also suggests the following keywords to search for related content on: air war, southern iraq, provide excuse, dropped southern, downing street, war, dropped, Iraq, august, news, southern, August, iraq, excuse, bombs, air, congress, Congress, british, provide, bombing, march, blair, Downing, Blair

What links here: View a list of other entries in this blog (if any) that link to this entry

Or look generally for informational pages on my website tagged with britain, iraq, intelligence, deception, war

Results of Semantic Search

A semantic search of Al-Muhajabah's Islamic Blogs suggests the following as the ten entries most closely related to this entry:



Elsewhere

External resources

Check out other web pages (if any) that I've bookmarked via del.icio.us that share the same tags: britain, iraq, intelligence, deception, war

Explore reference materials from Answers.com about these subjects: britain, iraq, intelligence, deception, war

Read news stories at Common Times about these subjects: britain, iraq, intelligence, deception, war

View search results at gada.be metasearch service for these subjects: britain, iraq, intelligence, deception, war

Find books at Amazon.com on these subjects: britain, iraq, intelligence, deception, war

Other views

Want to see what other bloggers have to say about the article I cited above? Check these resources to see lists of blogs (if any) with entries that are about this article or have linked to it.

Check Waypath for blog entries generally related to this entry, or Technorati or Bloglines for blog entries that link to this entry.

Technorati tags: View blog entries, bookmarks and photos tagged by others with the same subjects as this entry:



Search options

     

For external resources on the topic of this entry, you can run a search for its title the real news in the downing street memos (Google, DayPop, Feedster) or keyword(s) britain iraq intelligence deception war (Google, DayPop, Feedster). Or search for pages related to the cited article. DayPop is a search engine similar to Google that focuses on searching news sources and blogs. Feedster searches blogs via RSS feeds.