Conspiracy

I have generally kept my conspiracy theories to myself—not out of fear of ridicule, and certainly not out of fear of being linked to QAnon, which is at the extreme end of the opposite corner of the conspiracy theory universe and protected by an enormous and growing black hole of misinformation—but because I only half believe my CTs. I invent them for my own private amusement and do not widely share them. Also, I am lazy, too lazy to do any digging in search of facts to confirm or refute my CTs.

However, the recent revelations by Ben Barnes have resurrected my long buried CT on Iran-Iraqgate. Mr. Barnes confirms that in the summer of 1980 candidate Reagan’s minions, of which he was one, did their best to contact those in power in Iran to let them know they would get a better deal if they did not release the hostages until after the election, if Reagan won. Mr. Barnes said that he and his mentor, former ambitious Democrat turned ambitious Republican John Connally, traveled to a number of foreign countries to get the word out, and William Casey, Reagan’s campaign manager and later Director of the CIA, met with Iranian officials in Madrid in July 1980. All of which might well amount to treason, something no American president would ever do…with the exception of Nixon who urged the South Vietnamese government to slow down on the Peace Talks until after the 1968 election when he would give them a better deal, if he won.

For those with faulty memories and the very young too lazy to do independent research into the Iranian Hostage Crisis, I’ll let our trusty US Department of State explain who the hostages were:

 On November 4, 1979, Iranian students seized the embassy and detained more than 50 Americans, ranging from the Chargé d’Affaires to the most junior members of the staff, as hostages. The Iranians held the American diplomats hostage for 444 days.

NB: The fact that the Dept. of State says “more than 50” rather than the precise number of 52, is evidence of their habitual avoidance of hard facts.

Had then President Carter’s administration been successful in bringing the hostages home before the election, in what the Reagan people and the press called the October Surprise, at least 75 days would have been knocked off the detention time for >50 hostages. (Election day to inauguration day = 75 days.) I don’t know if hostages get paid overtime or hazardous duty pay, but I have a gut feeling that at least some of the 52 would have welcomed an earlier release.

As with most CTs there is no hard evidence of this portion of my theory, other than travel records and Mr. Barnes’ word. Mr. Barnes and Mr. Connally did travel to various Middle Eastern countries and Mr. Casey did go to Madrid and then to a meeting in Dallas.  However, the fact that the hostages were released a few minutes after Reagan was inaugurated and Carter left office, on 20 January 1981, should make anyone’s antennae tingle.

Thus began our tango with Iranian mullahs.

Before delving further into my CT, I will diagram (not-literally) certain steps in this complicated tango to help those who are dance-impaired:

Nov 4, 1979 – Iranians take US Embassy personnel hostage.

Nov 14, 1979 – Congress passed and President Carter signed an arms embargo on Iran, making it illegal to send military hardware to Iran

Sep 1980 – Iraq invades Iran

Nov 1980 – Reagan elected President, promises to continue arms embargo because Iran supported terrorism.

Jan 20, 1981 – Reagan inaugurated.

5 minutes later – Iran releases hostages.

1981 – 1986 – Reagan administration illegally sold arms and weapons parts to Iran that they badly needed in their war against Iraq.

1981 & 82 — The Boland Amendment outlawed funding of the murderous Nicaraguan Contras

1985 – Reagan administration secretly used funds from arms sales to Iran to fund Contras (although fascinating in itself, the Contra part in this affair is only marginally related to this CT).

Dec 1986 – An independent Counsel was named to investigate possible criminal actions, resulting in 11 convictions.

May 5, 1987 – Iran Contra Hearings began. Televised.

May 17, 1987 – An Iraqi jet attacked the USS Stark in the Persian Gulf, killing 37 American sailors. Iraqi Dictator and long-time U.S. ally Saddam Hussein said it was a mistake. (Various CTs have the jet pilot executed, given a hero’s welcome, or living the good life in Iran).

1990 & 91 – Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm, the Hollywoodish names for the first war against Iraq, under Bush the First

1993 – Bush the First, pardoned 11 Reagan administration officials convicted in the Iran-Contra affair, possibly pre-empting his own indictment.

March 2003 – Bush the Second ordered the invasion of Iraq to find and destroy the chimerical weapons of Mass Destruction and, incidentally get our final revenge on Saddam Hussein.

Let me put some meat on this bare-bones timeline. Before the Iranian revolution the Iranian military shopped for supplies in the U.S. The military hardware Iran bought in the U.S. naturally required U.S. repair parts and munitions to keep the rifles, cannons, tanks, missiles, etc. in fighting condition. The 1979 arms embargo meant that we could not legally send armaments, repair parts, and munitions to Iran. When Hussein’s Iraqi forces invaded Iran a month or two before the 1980 U.S. presidential elections, the Iranian mullahs just might have realized that they needed U.S. hardware in a hurry. The Reagan campaign was worried that an October Surprise, e.g., the release of the hostages the month before the presidential elections, would be a big boost to Carter, big enough to defeat Reagan, big enough for a worried Reagan to promise military hardware to Iran despite the embargo. Supplying Iran with military hardware was against U.S. law, but the Reagan administration did it for 7-8 years. Asking the Iranian mullahs to hold off releasing the hostages was treason, but according to Barnes the Reagan administration did that. And the illegal shipment of arms was the quid pro quo. During the Iran-Contra hearings, the Reagan administration advanced the argument that they were only shipping arms to Iran, in order to secure the release of American prisoners held in Lebanon. That seemed more patriotic and therefor more excusable than to admit that their law and order administration illegally shipped weapons and hardware to Iran in order to secure the continued detention of the American prisoners held in Iran until after the US presidential elections.

When the Reagan administration got caught violating the arms embargo, the Iran-Contra hearings began. While the details of the Contra connection seemed most riveting to the American Public, I feel certain that to Saddam Hussein the more riveting connection was that the US was supporting both Iran and Iraq with weaponry, and perhaps intelligence as well (we gave satellite images of Iranian troop movements and emplacements to Iraq; why not satellite images of Iraqi troop movements and emplacements to Iran?). The brutal Iran Iraq war killed anywhere between 500,000 to 2,000,000 people, including combatants and collateral damage (the wonderful military euphemism for civilians).

We cannot know when Hussein became aware of this duplicity, and it is possible that it was but mere coincidence that soon after our duplicity became public knowledge (televised hearings began on 5 May 1987), an Iraqi jet mistakenly attacked an American ship, killing 37 American sailors (17 May 1987). Mistakes do happen. As do acts of revenge.

Now to the crux of my Conspiracy Theory: high level U.S. politicians, intelligence and military officers knew or believed that the attack on the USS Stark was deliberate, an act of revenge by Saddam Hussein for our secret support of Iran during that terrible war, and those high level U.S. politicians, intelligence and military officers vowed to someday take revenge on Hussein.

Another, or corollary, CT popular at the time (not mine, although I give it a high plausibility rating) advances the idea that our high level politicians, intelligence and military officers lured Hussein into invading neighboring Kuwait—our payback for his revenge. When Iraq moved some military units (US intelligence and military officers exaggerated the size of the force) into Kuwait, Bush the First launched Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm and sent them scurrying back to Iraq. US forces did not enter Iraq in hot pursuit, possibly because our allies would have objected.

Back to my CT: the thirst for revenge by high level U.S. politicians, intelligence and military officers was not sufficiently slaked by merely pushing Hussein’s forces back to Iraq. As he was still in power, their thirst grew through the years and when a group of Saudis attacked the Twin Towers and the Pentagon, on 9/11/2001, they saw an opportunity to quench that thirst. All the world was on our side, well, most of it, because of that terrorist attack, and Bush the Second took advantage of that good will to build an international coalition to invade Iraq, which had nothing to do with the 9/11 terrorist attack, by claiming, falsely, that Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.

In sum, my CT theory is: We invaded Iraq because they attacked a U.S. Navy ship, which they did because we supplied Iran with military hardware during a terrible war, which we did because Reagan wanted to avoid an October Surprise and be elected President. Simple, really.

What? You say that statesmen would never stoop so low, especially when so many lives, so much destruction is at stake? Hmph. I contend that foreign policy based on petty emotions is the norm. Remember: another of statesman Bush’s well-articulated reasons for invading Iraq was “they tried to kill my dad.”