Beck: "We went into Iraq three years ago to prevent World War III"
CNN host Glenn Beck declared that the reason the Bush administration stated for invading Iraq in 2003 -- that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction -- was "just gravy" and that the "real objective" was "to prevent World War III ... to prevent the evil Iranian ideology from spreading across the region."
On the July 24 edition of his CNN Headline News program, host Glenn Beck declared that "[w]e went into Iraq three years ago to prevent World War III ... to prevent the evil Iranian ideology from spreading across the region." Earlier, he said "the real reason we went into Iraq was Iran." Describing "the reason the administration gave us" -- that Saddam Hussein possessed a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) -- as "real" but "just gravy," Beck stated that "President Bush decided to not tell us the real objective" because "we just wouldn't understand that we were in the early stages of World War III."
As Media Matters for America has noted, Beck has frequently labeled the conflict in the Middle East "World War III." Later in the program, Beck said: "I truly believe these mullahs are far worse than Hitler. I mean, Hitler was crazy evil. I believe these guys are biblically evil."
From the July 24 edition of CNN Headline News' Glenn Beck:
BECK: Do you remember when -- here we go, something you're not going to hear elsewhere, at least from a conservative -- remember when we first went in to Iraq a few years ago? And we said it was because of weapons of mass destruction. Well, I got news for you: It wasn't. That was just gravy. That was the reason the administration gave us, and it was real. But they gave us this explanation so the public could wrap their heads around going to war.
My radio listeners know this, because I've been beating this drum since before we even went into Iraq. The real reason we went into Iraq was Iran. We were going there to stop Iran by planting the seeds of democracy all around Iran. Then, we hoped, that the Iranians would stand up and topple their leaders and their evil plans. The people in Iran hate him so much, they actually prefer us.
At the time, President Bush decided to not tell us the real objective. I'm guessing -- I don't know why -- either for geopolitical reasons, or because he felt, you know, we just wouldn't understand that we were in the early stages of World War III. And unfortunately, I think a lot of people are still there. But search yourself inside. Doesn't it feel like we're there?
[...]
BECK: I was talking to my -- I was talking to my sister over the weekend, yesterday. My nephew, her son, Bo, is leaving for a tour of duty in Iraq in two weeks. She told me, she said, "I support him. I support what he's doing. I'm so proud of him." She said, "But Glenn, I don't understand why we're even in Iraq."
I asked her, "Do you believe we're in World War III or on the verge of World War III?"
She said, "Yeah." She said, "In fact, I've been talking to my friends about it, and we all just -- when I asked people, they automatically say, 'Oh, yeah. I know.' They all agreed that we're at the beginning of World War III."
We went into Iraq three years ago to prevent World War III, as nuts as this might sound, to prevent the evil Iranian ideology from spreading across the region. We have to succeed there. The lives of our family will be seriously affected. You will not recognize the world if we lose.
Here's what I do know today. I know that searching for weapons of mass destruction was a side benefit of going into Iraq. The real reason was to plant the seeds of democracy and change the face of the Middle East.
[...]
BECK: I just want to tell you that I truly believe these mullahs are far worse than Hitler. I mean, Hitler was crazy evil. I believe these guys are biblically evil.
And don't miss tomorrow's program. We have a series starting tomorrow on the coming of the messiah. We'll do that tomorrow.
The other right-wing media mogul you should worry about
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
Flag if you like, but this is a gem.
[link to www.crooksandliars.com]
And was shocked at how Matthews spoke about Bush, he made great points.
On the topic of Beck, the guy is a nobody.
Unlike most of the right wing nut jobs I don't buy Beck, I don't believe he truly believes the things he says, it's so contrived. He's just cash in on the controversy market.
First he sounds like he wants to marry every GOPer he has on his show, then he openly criticizes Bush for the very strategy he seems to adore. Where is it with this guy. End of off topic.
So, again: if we're in WWIII, then Bush's objective "to prevent WWIII" failed, right?
Bush failed.
Just say it, Glenn.
President Bush also failed in stopping Iran from conquering Iraq. We just ended up doing it for them.
We invaded Iraq and installed a Shiite Islamic government that has strong ties to Iran.
The only thing different is that we did it instead of Iran. The result is the same.
He should have stopped right there. That is nuts. and also totally naive. How does it make sense to invade a country that wasn't a threat to prevent the "evil Iranian" ideology? Well Ive got news for you Becky boy. It didn't work. Thanks in a large part to our invasion of Iraq, Iran has now become a major player in the region.
Just when you think they cannot come up with any shiny new inane and totally bogus excuses for invading Iraq here comes another brain dead sychophant who does. I will give him an A for effort its dumb, but its original.
If what Beck says is true:
1. Why are we now in WWIII, WWIV, etc. as many other conservative pundits are saying? Was the attempt to thwart WWIII done so poorly as to actually start it?
2. If our intention was to stop Iranian influence in Iraq, then why did we allow a Shiite Islamic Republic (that is very Iran friendly) to replace Saddam, who by all accounts wasn't friendly to the Iranians? Is the Bush Administration really that inept?
3. If Iran really is/was the problem, why didn't we make a case for invading Iran to get to the root of the problem? Why didn't the administration just substitute Iran for Iraq on their bogus intelligence reports. After all, Toby Kieth can't tell the difference between the two, why wouldn't the rest of America?
Exactly, and point three especially. I was talking to a conservative friend not long ago and he implied that a big part of the reason we invaded Iraq was to "flank" Iran, like it was part of some master plan for that exact purpose. I asked him if we were playing a game of Risk. We already had invaded Afghanistan, we could use that as an entry point into Iran. Invading a sovereign nation and fighting an insurgency for three years in order to have an extra access point to a country that we've spent too many resources to invade anyway...just brilliant. Coming up next, George Bush explains why we should eat tomato soup with a fork instead of a spoon.
This has to be the dumbest execution of a military plan ever. If we wanted Iran we could have just gone in through Afghanistan and left Iraq alone. What were the Iranians going to do, flee to Iraq? And there had to be a stronger case for invading them instead of Iraq anyway. It certainly couldn't have been any weaker!
These people have been spinning so hard they're suffering brain damage.
So, by giving Iraq a chance to elect people sympathetic to Iran, where previously the two countries had been bitter enemies, we're stopping their ideology from spreading. By toppling a secular government, we're preventing more islamic ones from popping up.
And we're in WWIII, when the whole point of the war was to prevent WWIII, but Iraq is a glowing success and we should send more troops over there. Apparently we failed miserably, but we should keep plodding on.
I can't help being reminded of one of my favorite movie lines:"This may very well be the stupidest person on the face of the earth".
nuff said!
The two great prophets of the Bush, jr. Administration.
It helps that this administration doesn't even know that they are a farce.
Now I understand. Everyone thought Bush was panicking when he sat reading My Pet Goat after being told about the WTC attack, but he fooled us all. Ever the master tactician, he was formulating the clever plan that would become his brilliant Middle East strategy. He would "not tell us the real objective" for the Iraq invasion, knowing we could not, as mere mortals, possibly understand the depth, complexity and foresight of his vision. Instead, he just went in to "git-r-done" and let us in on the details and rationale when he thought we would be capable of understanding them. The successes are obvious. As a "side benefit" we've found a few long forgotten caches of the WMD's we probably sold to Saddam 20 years ago. And the seeds of democracy, once planted in the fertile fields of Iraq, are clearly flourishing beyond anyone's wildest expectations.
Crazy evil? Biblically evil? You decide. Evil like fox, I say. Thanks, Glenn! You're Brilliant! Brilliant!!
Is it just me or every time something happens in the world the wingnuts come up with a new “real” reason for the invasion. Do they even keep track of how many “real” reasons they now have? Now this new one is a doozy. If Beck bothered to take 10 seconds to think this theory of his through he would have realized how truly dumb it was. If the goal was to weaken Iran then don’t you think it would have been a good idea to not have replaced an enemy of Iran with a new government that shares Iran’s politics and ideology? If one were to accept Beck’s ill-conceived theory then they would have to be shouting total failure of mission since one thing we can all agree on is Iran now has a new partner in the region…the new Iraqi government.
...to free 50 million people from tyranny. any wonder that most republicans think saddam had wmd. they think what they're told to think, believe what they're told to believe.
No doubt CNN knew what they were getting before they got Beck. It is no coincidence that all the neocon pundits from Fox, CNN, and NBC (MSNBC) continually spew out the same messages at the same time: WWIII, not reporting enough good news in Iraq, immigrant threat, flag desecration,... These issues never get resolved, but "coincidentally" these media networks emit the same messages all at the same time (on cue). The question is on the WWIII reporting is how do they stop reporting we are on the verge of WWIII, unless they know the neocons have plans on expanding the war? It is not like the War on Christmas which is just a seasonal fib.
that even 30-some percent of my fellow Americans can be lied to repeatedly and brazenly, and not notice.
I'm still amazed that local/state elections are showing close races, that anyone connected with the GOP has any cred.
I don't know how I'm going to handle 2008. I'm hopeful, and see signs of people waking up, but still anxious about the slow 1/3 of my class.
No one has benefitted more from our invasion of Iraq than Iran. Iran should thank our wonderful president everyday for removing Saddam as well as the Taleban in Afghanistan. Both were Sunni and major thorns in Iran's side. Why do you think the repugs supported Saddam all those years ago? This guy is plain ignorant of the politics of the middle east. I think to committ evil you have to believe beyond doubt you are right. Nazis believed in their superiority, not to mention the pay back for the Versailles treaty, the Mullahs believe they know Allah's will completely and without error, in the same way the Robertsons and the Falwells believe they know God's will. All I am certain of is rampant injustice throughout the world.
Except maybe Osama
So for some reason it makes more sense to invade every country around Iran instead of going into Iran itself.
Well hey. We're only four years into the first seed of democracy and we're almost halfway done with it. Another... 20 years or so and the plan should be complete.
I agree with him - I think that the Bushies did go into Iraq for the reason he mentions: "going there to stop Iran by planting the seeds of democracy all around Iran. Then, we hoped, that the Iranians would stand up and topple their leaders and their evil plans."
As idiotic as it sounds, I think that it was EXACTLY what Bush was hoping for, but the excuses given were WMD, and later the vague "to spread democracy".
The plan was bound to fail, doomed from the beginning, but tell that to the neocons, who of course also were interested in making monetary gains from the situation, and managed to sell the "spread democracy" at least to Bush, who was probably easy to dupe.
I believe that these clueless individuals actually did believe that they'd come out of this like heroes, going down in history as the ones who brought democracy to the middle east. And I also believe that they felt it was worth the risk, because it was a win-win situation for them: either it worked, and they spread democracy, got the kingdom and the glory - I bet they saw this as the most likely outcome. Or it didn't, and they'd end up profiting on rising oil prices, and be incontrol of a war which they themselves, thanks to the administration's policies in other areas, would not lose anything on, on the contrary.
So as depressing as it is, I think Beck is right about that part.
It was well thought out in contrast to what Beck said.
It looks as though the Administration did not take into account Newton's Laws of Motion as they apparently apply to politics. For every political action, there is an equal and opposite political reaction.
Invading an Islamic country on a false pretense caused Iran to elect a hard-line Islamist as president. Hezbollah took over the Palestinian government and Hezbollah made huge gains in the Lebanese government as well. In the run-up to the war, Turkey also turned to the right.
As silly as it may seem, I don't think the neocons ever really considered that our military presence in the Middle East might actually increase Muslim hostility towards us in the region.
WTF???
...And don't miss tomorrow's program. We have a series starting tomorrow on the coming of the messiah. We'll do that tomorrow...
and at the end of the show he gives away a set of apostolic steak knives...what's going on with this guy? what's going on with T.V. over there???
To begin with, Beck is now openly acknowledging that Dubya' LIED to the American people in order to justify a war of aggression against Iraq. Only, Beck tells us, this is a GOOD thing! We NEEDED to be lied to because we wouldn't have been capable of understanding the true BRILLIANCE OF BUSH!!! Yes, brilliance, I say. George the Genius Bush - the words just roll off the tongue, don't they?
And just what was the genius of these acts? We were able to confound & contain those EVIL IRANIAN MULLAHS by taking out their most aggressive enemy & replacing him with a stable, democratic state. Okay, granted that it is a 'democratic' nation with a Shiite majority that is openly sympathetic to their Shia brethren in Iran, but even Bush the Brilliant can't be expected to think of EVERYTHING, can he? It's an error that can, no doubt, be traced to the failures of the cut-and-run Democrats.
Who could even question the tactical brilliance of this scheme? Oh, sure... there have been a few unforseen bumbs & bruises along the way, but reordering reality along neocon lines was bound to be a messy business. Besides, the media are only telling us the bad news, & ignoring all of the schools we've painted, and the candy that we've handed out to smiling children, and... and... ah, f*ck it. I'm so disgusted with this pasty-faced mediocrity that I can't even manage to keep a satirical line going. Jesus, the stench from his reguritated talking points is starting to overcome me.
World War III? Is this the best they could do? I know that they're just starting to trot out this particular mendacity, & that they won't commit to it 24/7 until sometime around late September, but still... WTF. Does Beck's own sister actually buy this rancid disgorge? Maybe. Who knows... he might be the SMART one in that family. He, at least, knows that its a conjob, & that its his responsibility as a good neocon to market this vile bullsh*t to as many mental deficients & angry Christians as possible before November.
This is only the beginning.
"He, at least, knows that its a conjob, & that its his responsibility as a good neocon to market this vile bullsh*t to as many mental deficients & angry Christians as possible before November."
Great post. I enjoyed it on many levels...I laughed, I cried (mostly from laughing). Two thumbs up!
"Beck is now openly acknowledging that Dubya' LIED to the American people in order to justify a war of aggression against Iraq. Only, Beck tells us, this is a GOOD thing! We NEEDED to be lied to because we wouldn't have been capable of understanding the true BRILLIANCE OF BUSH!!!" --Mescal
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
That reminds me of a quote:
Power always thinks it has a great soul and vast views beyond the comprehension of the weak; and that it is doing God's service when it is violating all his laws. -John Adams
If we are to believe Beck, Bush is the worst kind of elitist -- a despot.
This is WWIII? More evil than Hitler?
Well then, I'm sure Mr. Beck will be first in line at his local recruitment office...right? I mean, he does have the courage of his convictions doesn't he?
I get a kick out of the Yoda-like "But search yourself inside. Doesn't it feel like we're there?"
I also enjoy the double-speak that allows WMD to be "real" but not the actual cause of the invasion.
President Bush decided to not tell us the real objective. I'm guessing -- I don't know why -- either for geopolitical reasons, or because he felt, you know, we just wouldn't understand that we were in the early stages of World War III.
Do people really want the government to lie to them? Do they want the government to treat them like imbecilic children, that they're too stupid to understand the world?
Beck seems only too happy to be treated thus.
Not me!
Beck is describing a "Benevolent Despot", a leader who abuses his people for their own supposed good.
It's also a hypothetical concept that never manifests in the real world. But don't tell G.B. that...
We went into Iraq three years ago . . . to prevent the evil Iranian ideology from spreading across the region.
and boy howdy, look at what a good job we've done of that!
1) Disarm Iraq of WMD (btw we later found them according to Ricky Santurom).
2) Topple Saddam, he was a brutal dictator. Ain't the world a safer place without him? huh? huh? Well at least we killed his sons.
3) Spread freedom. Yep we spread freedom alright. Over 100 people a day are now dying in our occupation.
4) Chase down Al Qaeda. Mission accomplished or at least in it's last thro's.
5) Prevent a civil war. Now that we're there we can't just leave.
Glenn Beck is a hateful man who wears diapers. Why anyone would listen to or watch this ninny is a real head scratcher. I stopped following his rants except on sites like this. I'm a happier human for it.
We started an {illegal} war three years ago . . . to prevent a war now . . . that Beck said last week we were already in . . .
OK . . .
I'm starting to think Beck rode the short bus to school.
Wingnut land.
Justifying a bad policy in Iraq was initially done by spinning various situations (perhaps WMD's, supporting terrorism, etc). When the facts become too clear to deny, a smart conservative pundit will try to retreat into the "we made some mistakes but we had good intentions" argments.
Only the really low-IQ pundits like Beck keep trying to deny reality. I don't think the average war supporter still believes this stuff and I think people like Beck are just trying to one-up his fellow pundits with "strong" positions on current events.
The smart conservative pundits have moved on and are now trying to position themselves so they can maintain some level of creditility for the upcoming elections. Their media shows will be canceled when people stop watching, and they will stop as these people move further and further away from reality.
Even the group still supporting Bush (about 33%) has some contact with reality and, I predict, won't put up with crazy-pundits like Beck much longer.
It takes time
ahhh, the seed of democracy.
i'm sure that once the world finds out that our real motivation was to topple the evil empire and spread democracy in iran they'll all finally come to see it our way. we've done so well so far with korea, vietnam, iraq...who could argue.
thank you mr beck for finally bringing us the truth.