hepcat wrote: Fri Nov 08, 2024 9:39 am
I look back at the things folks predicted during George W's presidency and take solace in the fact that there were lots of claims of calamity, but nothing really happened (I mean, yes...a war...but that was going to happen no matter what thanks to 9/11).
There were two wars, only one of which was actually related to 9/11. The invasion of Iraq was all Bush, Cheney & Co, and it wasn't something they promised to do in the run-up to an election. In fact, I don't remember people predicting much in the way of doom when Bush was elected. He wasn't really vilified until after it became clear that the war in Iraq was justified on the basis of cooked intelligence.
And as far as Iraq goes, there are something on the order a half million corpses that would disagree that "nothing really happened" if, you know, the dead could talk.
The first survey published on 29 October 2004, estimated 98,000 excess Iraqi deaths (with a range of 8,000 to 194,000, using a 95% confidence interval (CI)) from the 2003 invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq to that time, or about 50% higher than the death rate prior to the invasion. The authors described this as a conservative estimate, because it excluded the extreme statistical outlier data from Fallujah. If the Fallujah cluster were included, the mortality estimate would increase to 150% over pre-invasion rates (95% CI: 1.6 to 4.2).
The second survey published on 11 October 2006, estimated 654,965 excess deaths related to the war, or 2.5% of the population, through the end of June 2006. The new study applied similar methods and involved surveys between 20 May and 10 July 2006.[4] More households were surveyed, allowing for a 95% confidence interval of 392,979 to 942,636 excess Iraqi deaths. 601,027 deaths (range of 426,369 to 793,663 using a 95% confidence interval) were due to violence. 31% (186,318) of those were attributed to the US-led Coalition, 24% (144,246) to others, and 46% (276,472) unknown. The causes of violent deaths were gunshot (56% or 336,575), car bomb (13% or 78,133), other explosion/ordnance (14%), air strike (13% or 78,133), accident (2% or 12,020), and unknown (2%).
Oh, and let's not forget that the rise of Islamic State doesn't happen without the invasion of Iraq and subsequent inept efforts at nation-building. So that's actually three wars, although this last one was after Bush's time in office.
tl;dr -- Well, actually, something did happen.
And in the same vein, something is definitely going to happen in Ukraine and the Middle East even if Trump doesn't immediately upend the apple cart domestically.
Trump will give Israel ‘blank check’ which may mean all-out war with Iran, says ex-CIA chief
Donald Trump will as president give Benjamin Netanyahu a “blank check” in the Middle East, possibly opening the way for all-out war between Israel and Iran, the former CIA director and US defense secretary Leon Panetta predicted.
“With regards to the Middle East, I think he’s basically going to give Netanyahu a blank check,” Panetta said of Trump, who won the presidential election this week and will take office again in January.
“‘Whatever you do, whatever you want to do, whoever you want to go after, you have my blessing.’ I mean, he basically said that [before the election].”
The Israeli prime minister has overseen attacks on Iran and its assets as part of a growing conflagration since Hamas attacked Israel on 7 October last year. He and the US president-elect were reported to have spoken during the US election campaign. Netanyahu congratulated Trump on Wednesday, after Trump’s victory over Kamala Harris was confirmed.
Panetta continued: “And so the real question there is whether Netanyahu decides to continue to try to expand that war, go after Iran, or do things that basically create an even greater concern about whether or not the Middle East is ever going to resolve itself or be in constant conflict.”
Speaking on the One Decision podcast, which he co-hosts with Sir Richard Dearlove, a former head of MI6, the British intelligence service, Panetta also said he expected Trump to favour allowing Russia to retain control of areas of Ukraine held since its invasion two years ago.
Most observers think Trump’s election is bad news for Ukraine, which the Biden administration has backed with military aid. Many analysts suggest Trump will be less constrained by advisers than during his first four years in office, free to do as he pleases while in thrall to Vladimir Putin, the Russian president he has long admired.
