Okay 9/11 truthers, since it seems that there’s a lot of you here, why would the Bush administration do it? To justify an invasion? We could have invaded anywhere we wanted any time we wanted. Thinking that we needed a lot of people to die on domestic soil in order to justify an invasion in the public eye is lib shit. So what’s left? Was the government whacking someone in the towers?
The bloodlust immediately after 9/11 was the highest I’ve seen in my lifetime, much like Oct 7th has been for the Zionist project. I could maybe buy that 9/11 was orchestrated to not just invade countries but to rally Americans around the flag and secure the empire as the End of History.
Except Bush didn’t do that. He could have pointed the finger at anyone and used that to orient the imperial project, but instead of using his biggest political windfall to start a war with Iran he blew his political capital on Afghanistan and then Iraq. Maybe he thought those would be easier occupations and he could use them to build momentum for Iran, but I don’t see it. It just seems opportunist, rather than planned.
Iraq and Afghanistan are just two of the countries in the region that US politicians have openly been plotting to invade for decades. Syria, Yemen, and Iran are also on this list. They’ve plotted this since the 70s and have openly admitted to it in interviews since then.
Iraq was part of the bigger picture, like Iran. It wasn’t just opportunistic, it was part of the plan from the beginning.
So why didn’t he invade Iraq first? Or further, why didn’t he skip all that and just invade Iran?
Why Afghanistan? It has some strategic importance but it’s certainly not that important.
That’s what makes it look opportunistic. It’s like no one really thought out how to best use 9/11 because it wasn’t actually planned out. They just had a political opportunity fall in their laps and then blew it on lesser targets.
Iran was a much harder target than Iraq. More mountains, more unified populace, a whole bunch of factors. Iraq had been crushed by a decade of sanctions and as far as I know never really recovered from the destruction wrought in 91. I have no idea how smart anyone in the Bush admin was, whether they had any idea what they were actually up against. Their complete, buffoonish ignorance about Iraqi culture and politics was a constant topic of discussion back in the day. The whole yellow cake kayfabe.
It’s hard for me, at least, to say how much of Iraq was planned and how much was a raft of fools stumbling from one disaster to another but always having unlimited funds and materiel to throw in to the chaos to keep things going. I’ve heard people who were there talk about the absolute clusterfuck at every level - From US soldiers who never really understood what they were doing, from people who worked in the “reconstruction” effort and described just mind-blowing levels of cultural ignorance and ideology. Views on the motive for the invasion have changed a lot over the years. It went form oil, to MIC grifting, to a large scale strategic plot to destabilize the region.
it was probably equal parts planned, plans going bad, culturally ignorant and incurious Americans, and the chaos of an inept state with an inpet military doing something really stupid with no clear objective. The US government isn’t a monolith, it’s neither helplessly foolish nor hyper competent. And probably a lot of cases where people’s expertise in one area didn’t translate to general competence.
Like I remember the absolute fiasco when un-armored Humvees that were never supposed to be anything but scout and utility vehicles started getting owned by IEDs. There was this whole period were the public found out that soldiers were welding scrap metal to their trucks to try to protect themselves from bombs. They found out there was really no defense against IEDs, the whole concept of an IED entered the public consciousness. I think the body armor thing was happening at the same time, where infantry didn’t have worth while body armor. Just cheap flak vests from the 80s if they had anything. It was a huge public relations disaster for Bush. They had to dump a lot of resources in to procurring body armor and MRAPs (Mine resistant ambush protected, a kind of large truck looking APC). The MRAP thing was a fiasco, every firm in the US that knew how to weld was building these over-weight, badly engineered, barely functional monster trucks. The US Army’s hardware is notoriously shit, from what I remember all they had at the time for infantry transport was unarmored trucks, bradley IFVs, and shitty old M113s. maybe a few of whatever the predessecor to the strykers was.
So they put in all these procurrement orders for any truck with armor and a V-hull, and they get tons of shitty overweight trucks that couldn’t go off road due to their massive weight and being massive top heavy, they couldn’t go on many roads in iraq for the same reason, they were all slapped together by MIC grifters so there were all kinds of parts problems, it was a huge mess on every level.
What happened there? Did the regime not anticipate the use of bombs and mines to ambush patrols? Did they think the Iraqis would just surrender and they wouldn’t need armored vehicles or body armor? Did they anticipate those things but believe that the US public would accept the resulting casualties? I have no idea. There are probably documents somewhere. How much of it was ignorance, how much was foolishness, how much was poor planning, how much was calculated indifference?
Everything you said just makes it all seem opportunistic to me, like they were just going for low hanging fruit to try to score “easy” wins. The fact that they were too ignorant and uncoordinated to stand a chance against the insurgency in Iraq reveals how unplanned everything was. What that says, to me, is that 9/11 was a happy accident that the Bush administration wanted to use but that they had no actual long term plans.
My take is that the US political class was operating on the correct belief that their violence would lead to an event that would give them the excuse they needed to launch USAPATRIOT and the GWOT, or something like it. I guess you could compare it to, idk, flooding of a drained swamp. You know that a swamp will flood next time there’s a big rain upstream. You don’t have to destroy the dikes. You just wait for your moment. Like a predator employing an ambush hunting strategy. They know prey will come along and they’re content to wait.
Analyzing the occupation and invasion is hard for me. If you assume their goal was to remove Saddam and create a stable regional “democratic” ally under US hegemony they clearly fucked up and were totally incompetent. If you assume their goal was to get filthy stinking rich, prop up the MIC, expand the US police state, and they didn’t really give a shit about Iraq or about the US military, then they succeeded spectacularly. Idk how much of each is true.
They can get filthy stinking rich doing nothing, though. They’re basically all insider trading and getting richer ever day no matter what, with or without a war. I’m sure there are some hungry ghosts who just yearn for an ever greater “more” and are not satisfied with just getting richer if they aren’t also getting richer faster, but they don’t have any plans bigger than that. Just more, forever.
If their goal was to expand US influence and dominance over the world, they failed. If their goal was to acquire cheap resources, they failed. If their goal was to assert US hegemony, they failed. If their goal was to stabilize trade and resource extraction, they failed.
I just don’t think they planned any of this out. They just bumbled from event to event and tried to opportunistically profit on a case-by-case basis, in turn being unable to build a long-lasting project, and that’s why it eventually became a debacle and had to be abandoned.
That also doesn’t really answer my original question: why did they start with Afghanistan? If the goal was Iraq, why bother? Just start there!
and the domestic and foreign intelligence on the attackers, the timing of the patriot Act, the anthrax attacks… easy to dismiss the passports as a wacky detail (and it is just a small piece of circumstantial evidence) but acting like 9/11 truth shouldn’t be discussed on here is high level lib shit
It was literally already written and waiting in a folder for the next time blowback came along and gave them an excuse. 9/11 was inevitable, someone was going to blow something up sooner or later. They were just waiting for an excuse.
lol i would say the passports thing is a minor detail that doesn’t prove anything on its own but dismissing 9/11 truth out of hand is LIB shit. the commission was a massive coverup and the public deserves to know the truth, acting like it shouldn’t be a valid topic of discussion on here is doing state Dept work for them.
literally conflating 9/11 truth with aliens lol. at least try to uninternalise the yankee propaganda in your brain about this before speaking on it, I know it’s a topic where that’s been fed to you in a particularly intense fashion but if you think critically that makes it all the more important to question official narratives.
It seems like some wrap up 9/11 truth conspiracies into a bundle and throw them all away based on the most absurd ones, like the planes actually being taken away to some black site with all the passengers still alive.
In reality, if you view some of the details like the entire scenario surrounding the striking of the Pentagon, the very odd timing of air defense training/drills drawing fighter jets away from the region, and all the warnings from other intelligence agencies paired with Rumsfeld and friends’ actions that day, it seems just as absurd to say those were a ton of wacky coincidences
What truth do you want exactly? We already know that 9/11 was blowback, Bush had dealings with the bin Laden family, the feds were already surveilling the terrorists, and multiple intelligence agencies including the Taliban warned the US of a major attack. Most other things don’t matter at all. Hell none of these truths even matter because the country is brain dead and no one gives a shit.
What difference does it make if it was revealed that the Air Force shot down a plane and lied about the circumstances to make the victims heroes? We move on. We consume product. Then they argue about who becomes president and close down Guantanamo. Then we don’t do it. Feel free to prove me wrong. My proof is look around you. What happened after Snowden? What happened after Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib? What happened after MKULTRA? Kent State? All the mass shootings? FBI grooming mentally ill Muslims?
Right? I am so tired of this. there’s no exciting grand conspiracy, it’s just the normal bs the US does every day. It’s not a conspiracy because it’s all legal and they admitted to it. What “truth” to people expect to find? The US does a bunch of evil intelligence bullshit? That the US alphabet soup is a bizarre combination of frightening cold blooded competence and laughable keystone kops?
Like even putting aside that kinds of random shit survives fires, floods, plane crashes, nuclear bombings, what are we even talking about? How did they recover the passports? They picked them off the ground, just like they did huge amounts of other debris. This isn’t even a debunking, there’s nothing to debunk, stuff survives airline crashes and building collapses and every other kind of disaster. It’s completely banal, a leading question that leads nowhere.
Like, every event in the US is full of this. People are talking about the true-anon series about 9/11, and yeah, it’s full of weird shit because it’s America and we’re up to our eyeballs in spies, cops, foreign influence operations, terrorists, gusanos, Banderites, the scum of every coup and color revolution. This is a nation of assassins, thieves, spies, crooks, and criminals. You can find evidence of conspiracies everywhere because there are conspiracies everywhere. except, most of the time, it’s not a conspiracy because it’s legal and they admit to it. But it’s just boring shit; killing protest leaders, cops framing political enemies, insider trading, regulatory capture, intelligence failures, FBI entrapment bs. None of this is obscure or hidden or suppressed, it’s been front page news for decades. PREDATOR and ECHELON were conspiracy theories right up until Snowden spilled the tea, but after that the NSA wiretap scheme was blown wide open, all over the news. That UN investigator who locked himself inside a bag from inside the bag in the woods then died was screaming that Iraq had no WMDs, and people knew it at the time or shortly after. They didn’t care, they wanted blood and didn’t care whose blood it was, but it was in the news. Is it a conspiracy that he was killed for trying to fuck up the grift? Dude was found locked inside a duffle bag and they called it a suicide. That’s not a conspiracy, that’s a government that knows it’s untouchable and doesn’t care enough to cover its tracks. When the regime didn’t find WMDs they just moved the goal posts, right out in the open, where everyone could see it, and they got away with it. The Iraq war protest movement was one of the largest in history up to that time. Why doesn’t anyone remember it? It’s not a conspiracy, the US Media just deliberately didn’t cover it. No coverage, no impact on public awareness. Its’ not a conspiracy because it was legal and they did it in full view of the public.
literally conflating 9/11 truth with aliens lol. at least try to uninternalise the yankee propaganda in your brain about this before speaking on it, I know it’s a topic where that’s been fed to you in a particularly intense fashion but if you think critically that makes it all the more important to question official narratives.
Quit fronting. Nobody except for Burgerlanders give two shits about 9/11. “Why do Americans care so much about the 9th of November” is the extend most non-Burgerlanders acknowledge 9/11.
Add comment