False Flags anyone?

[ignoramus]

Are they only for the tinfoilers?
Who thinks Iraq1 was a false flag? Or was it a genuine honest Charlie foxtrot of misinformation.

The nutters are predicting Iran is next with a US ship going down (false flag)


What about NK? The way Kim is going, the west won't need a false flag to rub him off.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Iraq I a false flag? You mean the invasion of Kuwait?

I have no idea what you're talking about. Perhaps you could put some flesh on dem bones?

[vorlon13]

I thought this topic would be about Schumer and Trumply exchanging blow jobs yesterday . . .

[Losty]

Iraq I a false flag? You mean the invasion of Kuwait?

I have no idea what you're talking about. Perhaps you could put some flesh on dem bones?

Same. I don't know what this is about.

[Minimalist]

The notion that Bush could pull off any sort of conspiracy is mind-boggling.  That dickhead couldn't do anything right and certainly could not keep such a secret for 15 years.

And the WLB would tweet about his involvement the next day.

[Anomalocaris]

Are they only for the tinfoilers?
Who thinks Iraq1 was a false flag? Or was it a genuine honest Charlie foxtrot of misinformation.

The nutters are predicting Iran is next with a US ship going down (false flag)


What about NK? The way Kim is going, the west won't need a false flag to rub him off.

Iraq 1, you mean in 1989?

What exactly do you think false flag means?

[ignoramus]

WMD's

Was that Intel legitimate?
How could all the western players get it wrong?

[Thumpalumpacus]

WMD's

Was that Intel legitimate?
How could all the western players get it wrong?

Takes no big conspiracy to get that done. Underlings who sense what their bosses want to hear, coupled with selective reading of reports at this or that cabinet meeting, followed by an important UN speech to convince some other nations.

Of course the intel wasn't legitimate. Joe Wilson made that plain in the Valerie Plame affair. If that wasn't enough, there was that whole we occupied the entire goddamned country and shit was not found thing.

They got it wrong because people tend to believe what they want to believe. And the Bush Administration wanted to believe Iraq had this shit because we'd recently got hit by the most devastating terrorist attack in history.

[Anomalocaris]

WMD's

Was that Intel legitimate?
How could all the western players get it wrong?

That was not Iraq 1.  Iraq 1 happened in 1989.  It was done to punish saddam for invading Kuwait.  In the aftermath the existence of numerous sophisticated WMD programs prior to 1989 was amply verified.

As to the 2001 Iraq invasion, I think whether or not it was totally a false flag operation misses the point.   It could well be that wishful thinking and confirmation biase made the US regime see WMD where there was none, and so the flag was not intentionally false.   They may have thought a genuine false flag operation unnecessary because they fail to recognize the lack of quality evidentiary support for their cause.

But I believe that was merely a technicality.  The neo-conservatives certainly thought 9-11 was a unmissable golden excuse to allow the US to  rampage through the middleeast and reshape it to their liking. I don't believe they would have been stopped by the inconvenience if even confirmation biase and wishful thinking failed to produce apparent evidence of WMD.

[Thumpalumpacus]

It happened in 1991, but yeah.