Pragnosis,
I will address a few of your questions:
1. Democracy and Iraq. This was a stated goal, although it wasn't done very forcefully. I think this was for two reasons - the short-term threat was the unaccounted for WMD, and I think we wanted some wiggle room to potentially install Chalabi as the head of some interim government. However, it is clear that democracy was on the mind of the administration and not some goal made up to distract the news on the WMD front. Here are some excerpts from a speech in Feb 2003 by President Bush (emphasis mine):
Quote:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,904086,00.html
There was a time when many said that the cultures of Japan and Germany were incapable of sustaining democratic values. Well, they were wrong. Some say the same of Iraq today. They are mistaken. (Applause.) The nation of Iraq -- with its proud heritage, abundant resources and skilled and educated people -- is fully capable of moving toward democracy and living in freedom. (Applause.)
The world has a clear interest in the spread of democratic values, because stable and free nations do not breed the ideologies of murder. They encourage the peaceful pursuit of a better life. And there are hopeful signs of a desire for freedom in the Middle East. Arab intellectuals have called on Arab governments to address the "freedom gap" so their peoples can fully share in the progress of our times. Leaders in the region speak of a new Arab charter that champions internal reform, greater politics participation, economic openness, and free trade. And from Morocco to Bahrain and beyond, nations are taking genuine steps toward politics reform. A new regime in Iraq would serve as a dramatic and inspiring example of freedom for other nations in the region. (Applause.)
***
Success in Iraq could also begin a new stage for Middle Eastern peace, and set in motion progress towards a truly democratic Palestinian state. (Applause.) The passing of Saddam Hussein's regime will deprive terrorist networks of a wealthy patron that pays for terrorist training, and offers rewards to families of suicide bombers. And other regimes will be given a clear warning that support for terror will not be tolerated. (Applause.)
Without this outside support for terrorism, Palestinians who are working for reform and long for democracy will be in a better position to choose new leaders. (Applause.) True leaders who strive for peace; true leaders who faithfully serve the people. A Palestinian state must be a reformed and peaceful state that abandons forever the use of terror. (Applause.)
|
The roadmap to peace, with democracy for a Palestinian state was initially proposed by President Bush in June 2002:
Quote:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0020624-3.html
I call on the Palestinian people to elect new leaders, leaders not compromised by terror. I call upon them to build a practicing democracy, based on tolerance and liberty. If the Palestinian people actively pursue these goals, America and the world will actively support their efforts. If the Palestinian people meet these goals, they will be able to reach agreement with Israel and Egypt and Jordan on security and other arrangements for independence.
***
In the work ahead, we all have responsibilities. The Palestinian people are gifted and capable, and I am confident they can achieve a new birth for their nation. A Palestinian state will never be created by terror -- it will be built through reform. And reform must be more than cosmetic change, or veiled attempt to preserve the status quo. True reform will require entirely new political and economic institutions, based on democracy, market economics and action against terrorism.
***
Israel also has a large stake in the success of a democratic Palestine. Permanent occupation threatens Israel's identity and democracy. A stable, peaceful Palestinian state is necessary to achieve the security that Israel longs for. So I challenge Israel to take concrete steps to support the emergence of a viable, credible Palestinian state.
|
Hopefully, this gives you a flavor of the "democratic peace" strategy that the Bush Administration has embraced. It obviously hasn't borne much fruit to date, but it's ideological basis is clear, I believe.
2. The collapse of WTC 1 and WTC 2.
Here's the National Institute of Standards and Technology introduction report on their three year investigation into why the WTC towers collapsed.
http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1CollapseofTowers.pdf
Go to pages 39 and 40, which provides the pertinent information from the Executive Summary. Bottomline, it was a structural failure due to the weakening of the steel trusses that carried the floor loads, shifting those loads to the point where the structure couldn't handle the load. The primary culprit for the weaking of the steel trusses was the dislodging of the fireproofing material from the trusses, which then exposed them to the heat of the fire from the burning jet fuel. It also states that it could find no evidence to support alternative hypotheses such as a controlled demolition.
I'm sure that you'll find the information that you need to satisfy your questions about why the controlled demolition theory doesn't fly. If it's not in the report linked above, here's the page that lists all the subreports:
http://wtc.nist.gov/reports_october05.htm