While I’m certainly not one to jump up and defend George W. Bush or the Iraq war, something about this story is setting off my BS detector. Spy planes don’t fly “colors.” A U2 operates at an altitude of between 30,000-70,000 feet (cite) so even seeing it is going to be a challenge, despite paint. And does the UN even have U2 planes? According to the link I posted, they’re not user-friendly and they’re a bitch to maintain. It would be a terrible embarrassment to the US if they went through with this plan only to realize after the fact that the UN doesn’t have any high-speed high-altitude reconnaisance jets.
Well, as the memo exists it clearly is not bullshit unless you are saying both Sands (a highly respected figure in UK legal circles) and an extremely reputable and authorative news organisation are lying.
Neither has Downing Street denied it. And the idea was presumably to fly low enough to be shot at because the U2 can fly above intercept range even if fighters can’t.
Apart from the ridiculousness of the ‘U-2 in UN colors’ claim, there is the matter of Iraq shooting at US and UK planes on a fairly regular basis before OIF. If President Bush simply wanted a ‘technical’ violation of the 1991 ceasefire agreement, he already had it, going back several years.
In fact this is common knowledge, not anything obscure. They featured heavily in the build-up to war as part of the inspection regime. Hence shooting at a proper authorised UN one would be a breach/excuse for war.
Cite.
So yes, they would be flown with fighter cover (thus at low altitude enough to be shot at) and the UN does have U2’s - weapons inspector ones, too, which suggests that Bush would be able to say “They’re not just shooting at UN troops, but weapons inspectors! They must be hiding something!”
Okay so it’s a real memo describing a fictional and impossible situation. So what? I’m sure the Pentagon has memos documenting all kinds of wacky ways of poking at various hornets nests around the world. What is this memo going to prove about the wrongness of the war that hasn’t already been proven by all the other stupidity that’s been discovered so far? That the US is going to attack countries that it doesn’t like by inventing justifications? I’d hardly call that news or a surprise.
If you want to contribute to this debate read the cites. Great Debates is for debating not parading your extremely limited ability as a Bush Apologist.
spy planes under US colours flew as part of the Weapons Inspection process. A memo exists stating that Bush considered using one flying under false colours to provoke an attack. Debate that not your hand-waving fantasies.
If, by “contribute to this debate,” you mean “unconditionally adopt my viewpoint and rage,” I’m afraid that you’re about to be sorely disappointed.
Put me down in the “so what” category. The Bush (and to lesser extent, Blair) administration have actually done things much more egregious than the scheme outlined in the article. If true believers can dismiss the mountain of acts and deceptions already committed, they’re not going to be swayed by this, and wave it away saying “yeah, he thought about it…big deal…Saddam was a bad guy who had to be taken out by any means.” Those of us already disgusted by the administration’s actions have bigger fish to fry.
I don’t believe that tagos or the author of this purported ‘memo’ understand what a U-2 is. The aircraft is exceedingly slow, and capable of flying at very high altitudes. The U-2, in 2003, was capable of flying high enough that Iraq would not have the techinical means to shoot it down, short of aerial intercept. Any escort we may give to one would not be in the ‘WW2’ style of flying off the wing of the U-2; we we simply have some fighters in the area. Well under the U-2 they would be protecting, mind you.
Not to mention, the only color scheme that the USAF U-2s currently wear is black. Those given to NASA wear the white with blue stripes, while those given to the UN wear nothing, because they do not exist. U-2 flights may be undertaken ‘on behalf’ of the UN, but make no mistake: They are USAF aircraft, flown by USAF pilots.
Perhaps President Bush should have gotten a SR-71 out of mothballs, strapped a GAU-4 to it, and used it to strafe AQ trucks in Afghanistan. It makes about as much sense as painting a U-2 and intentionally flying it within the enemies engagement envelope.
Bush apologist? Sorry friend, I’m Canadian. I have no love for Mr. Bush. And yes I would like to actually debate so please stop lobbing insults.
The story is a molehill being presented as a mountain. The US couldn’t fly a spy plane painted up as a UN plane because it would require too many people to be in on it from the start, including people at the UN. Have you taken that into account? Let’s say this plan did go through and Iraq shot at the spy plane. Bush goes on TV the next day and says he’s going to kick Iraq’s ass all over the map for the “unprovoked” attack. The day after that, a high official at the UN says “Wait a minute… We didn’t have any spy missions laid on for that day…” That’s what I’m talking about.
There’s a reason why the US didn’t use this plan as the basis for starting a war. It’s because it’s not a very good plan. And as I recall in the end result the US didn’t actually end up needing a reason to attack Iraq. They just went ahead and did it anyhow. So why am I supposed to be upset about this memo again?
Uhmmm… is the debate here whether some people thought that sending U-2s on a UN mission was something actually considered or not? Because, for a brief time, it was. That’s a fact. Actually, one of the chief Democratic opponents of the war in Iraq suggested it:
Lest someone mis-interpret this as an antecedent/justification for the Bush plan, would it be safe to assume that Senator Levin was proposing using U-2s to search for WMDs , while the Bush administration was proposing using U-2s as decoys?
I understand full well what a U2 is. So you’re saying that sands and Channel 4 News are lying? That the UN did not have U2’s in their colours in Iraq? Well you are just flat out wrong.
Surely the news that U2’s were used in the build-up to the war to look for WMD’s isn’t a surprise. I can’t believe anyone who feels qualified to comment doesn’t know this. It doesn’t take a google-fu expert to confirm it.
So unless you’re arguing that c4 and Sands (who produced the infamous Downing Street memo) are liars then this plan was considered by Bush.
Downing Street have not issued a denial.
So Bush considered the plan. The UN used U2’s painted in UN colours on approved flights. Feel free not to be outraged, feel free not to remember it when Syria or Iran allegedly pull some bullshit stunt.
Maybe there is no debate other than how dare they even consider such a stunt. It is further proof what lying sons of bitches Blair and Bush are. But no news there I suppose.