The Motivation for the Invasion of Iraq was Ancient in Origin
It was not Because of 9/11
Why did we go to war in Iraq and Afghanistan? Most people will say it was "because of 9/11", but it really doesn't seem like that was the reason at all. 9/11 seemed more like an excuse rather than a reason -- 9/11 was the excuse, but not the reason. Why were they going over there? We know they planned on going back into Iraq before 9/11 even happened, so it obviously was not the reason the United States invaded. Somehow 9/11 justified the invasion of Iraq, even though Iraq clearly had nothing at all to do with 9/11; something else was going on.
Bush, Cheney, PNAC, & The Criminal Conspiracy To Invade Iraq
A quick look at the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) reveals they did indeed plan to invade Iraq before 9/11. In fact, according to PNAC documents, the U.S. was planning military actions in seven countries in the Middle East well before 9/11 ever happened. Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran are the countries that were to be involved.
The U.S. has performed major military actions in all of these countries with the exception of Iran. Looking at current events, it seems to be clear they are setting up, sowing the seeds, and setting the stage for future military action in Iran. They have done in the Middle East exactly what the PNAC documents state they had planned to do. Why would we think anything other than an invasion of Iran is obviously going to happen at some point?
This seems even more clear when considering recent events. They have been telling us the whole time that Iran plans to make a nuclear weapon of some sort. Then, the U.S. Government omitted Iran from the terror list, and essentially gave them $150 billion through a deal that Obama made; that is more than the combined total the U.S. has given to Israel since 1948. What do you think is going to happen? What have they set up to happen? Even with the election of a new President (Trump), an invasion of Iran is coming; we know this because that is what they said they were going to do -- the pieces are already starting to fall into place. We know they plan these things in advance, and we know they carry out these plans most of the time, but why? Why are they doing this?
The results of U.S. involvement in the Middle East have been an absolute nightmare. The whole thing has been a failure, unless of course they wanted it that way. If they wanted the Middle East to be worse, the goal has been reached; maybe the goal was to destabilize the whole region. If the goal was to screw things up in the Middle East so badly we end up in perpetual war -- job well done. If the goal was to rob rights away from Americans and destroy our Constitution -- "mission accomplished". Maybe that is what George W. Bush meant when he stood in front of that sign. "Mission accomplished" -- "the Constitution of the United States of America has been destroyed." If that was the reason -- well done -- because it has absolutely worked; thanks.
WMD LIES - Bush Cheney Rumsfeld - THE ULTIMATE CLIP (Edited)
Weapons of Mass Destruction
They knew there were no "weapons of mass destruction" (WMDs) over there; they knew because they had already been all through that place back when George H. W. Bush was President during the first Gulf War. They knew there were no WMDs over there, yet all of them got up on TV and bombarded us with "WMD", "WMD", "WMD". For a while you couldn't even turn on the TV without hearing about "WMDs in Iraq" -- it was a brilliant brainwashing technique.
If there is any doubt about if the United States government knows how to brainwash people, have a look at Project MKUltra; this was a program developed by the CIA to learn how to brainwash people and control minds. They learned quickly and became very good at it; these people know exactly what they are doing. This is exactly what the government did with "WMDs in Iraq" -- they brainwashed the American people into believing something, that they already knew was not true.
Malaysian courts have found George W. Bush and nearly his entire administration guilty of war crimes concerning the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Their names are to be listed as "war criminals" in International Public Record; logic alone should tell us that something is not right here. Is brainwashing your own people to support a war, based totally on lies, considered a "war crime"? There was nothing that actually justified an invasion of Iraq.
Almost half a million children were killed in Iraq; in total, more than 1.5 million people have been killed in Iraq as a result of U.S. military action. What would ever make it OK to kill that many people, especially children?
Is Osama Bin Laden really dead?
We were told that the reason they went into Afghanistan was to get Osama Bin Laden, but they didn't do that until eight years later; we still don't actually have any proof at all that he is dead -- other than them saying so. We all know how trustworthy the word of the government is, now don't we? Why would we trust anything they have said about any of this? They still won't even let us see one picture of Osama Bin Laden dead.
Do we actually have any evidence that Osama Bin Laden is dead? Wasn't he on the CIA payroll at some point? Is he really dead?
What they did do in Afghanistan, for sure, was to take over Opium production. Before the U.S. took over, Afghanistan Opium production was way down, nearly eradicated; but now, Afghanistan is the number one producer of Opium in the whole world. How does that make any sense at all? It makes perfect sense when you examine the massive increase in Heroin addiction in the U.S. since they took over Opium production in Afghanistan.
It was not About Freedom or Democracy
They didn't go over there to bring "freedom and democracy", as they claim; the government and the people of Iraq wanted the U.S. out of their country, but the U.S. would not leave. How is that "freedom and democracy"? How would we perceive it if some other country came over here to our country, took over, and then installed their form of government? How would that go over here in America? What would we call it if the exact same thing happened to us? Would that be "freedom and democracy"? It didn't have anything to do with "freedom and democracy" -- none of this works. Why did we go over there?
Was it for the oil? No, that line was "drawn in the sand" just before the Bush owned oil fields. The U.S. did not take any of the oil; they didn't even secure the oil fields, so that's not it -- none of this really makes any sense.
Ancient Discoveries in Iraq
Some people believe the reason for going into Iraq had to do with ancient technology. In the late 1990s, many discoveries were made in Iraq; ancient weapons, and other things, that appeared to be "highly technologically advanced" artifacts from thousands of years ago were discovered there for the first time. All of these discoveries were taken to the National Museum of Iraq to be studied and preserved.
The "first known" human civilization is thought to have been in the landmass named Iraq, but in the days of the "first civilization" it was called Sumer. The Sumerians were the "world's first", and some would argue the "most interesting" civilization. The Sumerian story is controversial and compelling, but no doubt, absolutely fascinating.
One thing modern archaeologists have discovered in Iraq is the tomb of Gilgamesh, who was said to have been trying to find the "secret of immortality". Before this discovery, many people thought the "Gilgamesh story" was a myth, but German archaeologists proved otherwise. Not only was Gilgamesh real, he was a king -- a Sumerian King. According to Sumerian tablets, their "kings" were not human beings -- they were aliens. According to those same tablets, over 400,000 years ago, aliens called "Anunnaki" from a planet named "Nibiru" came to Earth; these otherworldly beings became the "Kings of Sumer". According to the ancient tablets, Gilgamesh was one of the Anunnaki aliens from planet Nibiru.
After Sumer, the land we now call Iraq became known as Babylon; this is the same place the stories in the Bible refer to -- Babylon is Iraq. Interesting that Saddam Hussein claimed to be the "reincarnation of Nebuchadnezzar", who founded and built Babylon. One of the things Nebuchadnezzar apparently built was what the Bible calls a "fiery furnace"; which was, according to the story, "made of pure gold". People were able to go in and out of the "fiery furnace", but only with the aid of what some say was "alien" technology. They really did not seem to have control over this "machine", and appear to have needed some help with it. In the Biblical book of Daniel, is a story about three people named Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. These three were priests who, according to the story, "possessed the knowledge of Kabbalah"; this somehow made them "qualified" to work inside the "fiery furnace".
Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego were told to go inside, and "fix" (evidently it was malfunctioning) the "fiery furnace", but they had to put on "hats" and "cloaks" before entering. Some people believe that these "hats" and "cloaks" were what today would be appropriately called "radiation suits". Some people believe the Biblical "fiery furnace" was some type of "machine" that generated huge amounts of "heat and radiation". It was possibly a "gateway to another dimension" -- a "Stargate","wormhole", or some other extravagant technology that would kill people if they did not deal with it properly; this is why Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego had to put on protective clothing before going inside.
According to the story in the book of Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego got all dressed up in their protective gear, and went inside the "fiery furnace" only to discover that someone was already inside -- this should not have been; according to the Bible, this was one of the "sons of God". Whoever it was, how did they get in there? Where did this "son of God" come from? Was the "fiery furnace" actually a portal to another dimension? What are we really talking about here? Was this "fiery furnace" some type of exotic, highly advanced technology? Some people think it was.
In 2003, when the U.S. military invaded and took over Baghdad, they did not use "normal" military tactics. Typically, when there is going to be an invasion, military forces will start with the weakest targets first; then, they will conquer, and hold, more and more territory. By the time they face the more advanced enemy forces, they will have a pretty good chunk of land under their own control, making it easier to make an offensive. This is how things would "normally" work -- but not in this case. The U.S. military did not secure the countryside at all; they went right for Baghdad, and indeed, the National Museum. Why did they do that? It seems they might have been after some of those discovered "ancient technologies" -- they were there to get something out of that museum.
The U.S. military ended up taking enough stuff out of the Iraq National Museum to "fill up a transport plane"; this is an enormous amount of stuff. We don't know what they did with it, or where it ended up -- but we know they took it. Thinking about what they might have taken from the museum, and then thinking about the explosion in technology we have had since then, is very interesting. Could it be that our immense leaps in technology might have had something to do with what the U.S. military recovered from the National Museum in Iraq? Some people believe it does.
After the military had achieved their mission, the museum was allowed to be looted. Looters took over 170,000 items from the museum, much of which has been recovered, but not the stuff the U.S. took. How could they have allowed that museum to have been looted? The most ancient artifacts, going through the entire history of the human race, were inside that museum -- they stood back and let it get destroyed -- they did nothing to protect it! However, they did manage to protect the oil fields -- because those were the "orders".
An investigation was performed as to exactly what happened at the museum; the findings revealed that whoever looted the museum had "specific knowledge" of the building. The looters knew specifically where the "real artifacts" were located, and exactly how to get to them. The so-called "looters" passed right on by the "fake replica artifacts" that were for display purposes, and went directly to where the "real" ones were located. They had keys to doors, and were able to enter "secure areas" without causing any structural damage; these people were not random "looters" from the streets -- they were skilled, educated, and equipped people who knew exactly what they were doing.
There was something very specific in this museum that someone wanted. What was it? What could be so important to make all this fuss over? Maybe it was an ancient alien "weapon of mass destruction" -- there is your "WMD in Iraq" -- maybe they found one after all. What a joke, and indeed it is one, but all joking aside; some people legitimately believe this might actually be true.
We may Never Know
Many of these ideas cannot be proven, but they also cannot be disproven either. If there really is "ancient knowledge and technology", it is logical to think that whoever is in control of it, must -- at any cost -- maintain control over it. Whoever has it would have an advantage over everyone else, and be able to do things others cannot; they would know things others do not. Whoever controls this type of information would be in a great position of power. Could it be that the U.S. government had all along planned to go into Iraq -- to gain control over this "ancient alien" technology and information? Maybe they are trying to "make contact" with who the ancient Sumerians of Iraq called "our creators" (Anunnaki). Maybe U.S. government officials are being controlled by "them" -- maybe "they" ARE "them", and maybe this has something to do with the wars in the Middle East. Maybe not too, but whatever they have been doing seems highly suspicious and absolutely unnecessary.