Was the Iraq War really done to make the Executive Branch stronger?

[ck4829]

It is often suggested that there was an ulterior motive for invading Iraq.

Well, during a time of war, the power of the executive branch is increased AND we do have people in the Executive Branch or have served in it (Dick Cheney and John Yoo are prime examples) who think that the executive branch should be the strongest of the three branches.

Could the Iraq War have been used to dramatically increase the power of the executive branch?

[FiveGoodMen]

1. I'm sure that was one of the goals

But oil, military bases in Mid East, looting of the treasury through no-bid contracts and lack of oversite ... these were probably goals as well.

[blm]

2. To some extent - but I think the political motive was to divide Dem party before an election.

When you look at who was pulling the strings, this is the most POLITICAL white House in history, and campaign strategy ruled over EVERY policy or idea. Bush could ALREADY use force in Iraq with the priginal UN resolution, and never needed an IWR.

They were all about the politics and never the policy.

The first Bushie to jump ship, Iulio, said as much when he left.

[Solly Mack]

3. It helped greatly but so did Afghanistan

and even if the US had not invaded Iraq, Bush/Cheney would have just used Afghanistan to help increase executive power. And if neither country had been invaded, they would have just used the events on September 11 to do it.

In other words, they were aiming to expand executive power regardless...events took place that made it all too easy for them. They meant to find a way to do it regardless of what excuse they had to use.

[scarletwoman]

4. Well, it's certainly part of it. I'm hoping someone might have the link to an old article

where someone is quoted as saying something about how candidate bush already had it in his head that he wanted to be a "war president", and so had every intention of making sure the U.S. went to war somewhere if he became president.

sw