This interlude between conference tournaments and the dance has opened up my curiosity concerning one subject in particular, the Iraq War.
If you asked most insiders prior to his election in 2000, “How much expertise and wisdom will Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld bring to the table in terms of national defense and foreign conflict?”, the answer would be “a lot”. What Bush did back then was the right thing, as the best thing an executive can do for himself is to surround him/herself with competent people who know what the job is and how to get it done. He put his faith in these two people who he had known and looked up to for many years, and who’s to say that had any of us lived in his shoes, that we wouldn’t have made the exact same choices?
Because the Iraq War is failing, but the more I read, the more I’m becoming convinced that it wasn’t the mistakes that were made along the way as much as the mission was impossible to begin with. Given an invasion with the ‘proper’ amount of troops, subtract the Abu Gharib debacle and let’s say that even half of the graft that’s taken place didn’t happen…it’s still unlikely that this mission would ever have succeeded.
Most of this has to do with the arbitrary lines drawn, which initially made Iraq the country it is today, having crunched together three ethnic groups who probably never wanted to be nationalized together in the first place. Then you add in decades of the minority group in power, a reality that will never be forgotten by the Kurds and Shiites whose families suffered under the arrangement, and the chances of bringing these people together at all, let alone at gunpoint, was undeniably risky from the start.
How would Bush have known all of this? Well, he might have listened to his father and Powell instead of Cheney and Rumsfeld, but let’s not forget that the neoconservatives had been writing about how easy it would be to accomplish this mission for years. The division began when Bush Sr. decided against invading Iraq following the first Gulf War, and the folks who thought we should have, they never stopped talking and writing about it.
Bush was convinced that his father was wrong and that it would be possible to topple Saddam and install a democratic government, while also having the US cost covered by Iraqi oil revenue, that they would be happy to provide seeing as we liberated them. We all know how it turned out, and subsequently the pages of National Review and The Weekly Standard have sworn off neoconservatism as a failure. The political heavies like William Buckley have called the effort a failure, and ideas are shifting towards another ‘great idea’, most likely having to do with with something other than education, health care or national debt.
Regardless of all this, Bush trusted in the ‘ideas’ of these men he grew up admiring, and in his shoes it most likely seemed like the only thing to do. He was duped. I hope he figures this out sometime soon.
Gonna be a long wait Washington ! 🙂
Washington and Paul:
If you have ineptatude and corruption then whatever goals you set are irrelavant. That is the problem right now it does not matter what the current admin says they want to do, because it is not going to happen.
Like saying you want to go to mars and then not funding it. Or saying you want turn Iraq into a bastion of democracy and then hiring Haliburton. The goals may be good but everyone knows that this group cannot acheive them so who cares.
Karl,
So you are in power-what would you do? Is there any way that you can give us an idea instead of just saying “we should do this” or “we should do that”….
And Karl, you do recall the indictments against Mr. Clintons cabinet. Could we trust that bunch?
Washington:
Although I did explain this in another comment, here it is in the format you desire…
IF I WERE PRESIDENT, I would (concerning Palastine) –
1. Ensure that all aid coming from the US going to food, medicine or the basic needs of the Palistinian people is maintained
2. Get John Bolton to work on ensuring that other countries in the UN maintain their aid as well
3. Urge Israel to hold off on any offensive aimed at Palistinians for at least nine months
4. Get a message to Hamas that is also carried by the press in Israel, Palastine and the US – “We wish you luck. Aid will continue to flow into your country to allow for the critical work that needs to be done. Aid will not be cut off for at least a year, and in that time we hope that you’ll be able to focus on internal matters and gain a better understanding of the job that lies ahead for you and your people. For a period of six months there will be no military action taken against your people, and we hope that you’ll be able to take this as a good faith effort to make life better for each and every Palistinian.”
-Six months with no military offensive against Palastine
-Twelve months with no cut in humanitarian aid
Then we reevaluate every month, without fanfare or criticizm aimed at the Palistinian leadership. Deploy CIA agents ‘under cover’ into Palastine to monitor progress and verify their information with what both Hamas provides, as well as Israeli intelligence.
DO NOT SHARE CIA intelligence with Israel.
Explain to the Israeli and American people that a Democracy is not going to be perfect overnight, and that the important thing is we support the Palistinians during this period of historic transition…blah blah blah
KEY POINTS:
DO NOT mention religion in any public message directed either to the Palistinians or the American people
DO NOT allow for military strikes against militant elements within Palastine, but instead share information with Hamas (after 12 months) and see what they do with it (ie: do they arrest the people identified, do they hold them without trial, do they torture and kill them, do they allow them to escape, do they investigate and identify ties with an elected politician, what do they do then)
You give them enough rope to either hang themselves OR put it to good use. Back off long enough to give them the sense that we’re treating them like adults, then after a year’s time, prior to the next election, test the government in the way I’ve just described.
Because if they do the right thing with terrorists and/or corrupt officials within their own government, it’s a step in the right direction.
I would certainly share intelligence with the Israelis. They are our closest friends in the region. As for Hamas let the Saudis pay their freight . By the way Chris with Hamas in power there will be NO DEMOCRACY for the Palestinians ! It is incompatible with Islam. Read the Quran .
Paul – if we share intelligence with Israel about a ‘potential threat’, and they launch missiles into the neighborhood where this ‘potential threat’ happens to be located, it does no good in the long run.
Knowing what Israel will do means a lot less a this stage than what the Palastinian government will do.
As for Democracy – – – I see it as a system of government where the people regularly elect representatives to lead their country. With this being the standard, when an elected official fails to do a good enough job, they are replaced.
Where in the Quran does it say that electing a government is incompatible? Because elections is the standard as far as I’m concerned. How they tax their people, spend their money…it’s not an aspect of it that qualifies or disqualifies the government from being considered a democracy.
Paul, I sense that many people have pre-destined Hamas to fail in this task, and frankly, that’s not fair to the Palistinian people who elected them in good faith.
Well Chris you do have a plan.
It wouldn’t work because you failed to provide the means by which you would implement it.
How do you deal with the lobbies that will use the left and right to come at you?
Withholding intellegence from Israel means that they withold from us and they provide a great deal in Europe, the Middle East and Africa-where do we make that up?
Don’t mention religion…will you prohibit Congress from doing so?
And so on…
Chris- The Koran does not allow for a seperation of Church and state-that is a FACT. Do some research
Paul, we have to mediate here…not exist as an extension of the Israeli government. I’m looking to become Jewish, so I’m not against Israel…I just know that Israeli politics and public opinion work a lot like American politics and public opinion do.
And when UAB tries to buy our ports and we react a certian way…it coorelates with Israeli intelligence identifying a ‘possible target’ and a civilian leader deciding whether not attacking will make them appear weak to the Israeli people.
That’s an honest and real assessment that’s made prior to destroying the area the ‘possible target’ is located, but it’s not going to help Palastine get on it’s own two feet.
That’s OUR goal, and in public, it may also be stated as Israel’s goal. Knowing that Israel is living this and we’re an ocean away, perhaps our influence can be a bit more dynamic than it has been in the last couple of years.
We cannot side with Israel every time they act aggressively, in effect, deferring to them regardless of the situation. That diminishes our standing as mediator and only manages to turn Palastine towards isolationism, which at this stage, is a recipe for disaster.
Seperation of church and state is not a determining factor of whether an elected government can be called a democracy or not. Their religion may state this, but as long as the people are electing their leaders, it’s still a democracy. Is it acceptable for us here in America? For some, it indeed would be, but overall, no.
This isn’t America though, it’s Palastine.
We can’t define ‘Democracy’ in such narrow terms. Religion plays a major part in Iraqi politics, yet does the American government not consider Iraq a democracy?
As for not mentioning religion – obviously you can’t silence Americans, but the President can lay out the plan and stick to it himself, while the RNC urges Senators and Representatives to toe that line.
For these people, their religion is something you’re never going to talk them out of. On their own they might change, but the words of a western leader concerning THEIR religion is only going to be received negatively by the Palistinian people.
Washington:
First, I think we need to acknowledge realty. For example on your web-site you say that each insurgent can kill 15 coalition forces(I am paraphasing, but I think that is the jist of it)
That means that 20,000 insurgents will eventually kill 300,000 us troops. Personally I have a little more faith in our milatary but for the sake of argument we’ll assume your numbers are correct, and that the insurgency is 15 times more effective than the us army. By almost any measure that means the Iraq conflict is going badly. If you wont admit that, any discussion of what to do there is pointless.
I don’t doubt conservatives can come up with bigger goals, but if you cannot achieve them whats the point.
BTW, what does Clinton have to do with anything. Are you trying to say that since Clinton did it it must be OK. The Daily show did suggest that maybe Bush would be a little better president if he had someone like Lewinsky, but I think they were kidding.
I think that was the 3rd post in as many days on the topic of Operation Swarm…
Rolling Barrage has it being a reason to celebrate and assume that Iran pissed their pants.
I point out that not a SINGLE SHOT WAS FIRED, that the 700 Iraqi troops were joined by 800 US troops…so it was about the fact that they air assaulted the village (meaning, troops hoped out of helicopters and repelled down to the ground on ropes)…that they destroyed an insurgent hotbed, even though it wasn’t true.
karl, the math…I felt the same way.
The only reason I highlight it here is because I’m treated like I’ve got Terri Shiavo’s brain whenever I comment.
From what I’ve heard, I agree that it wasn’t the bombastic success that it was predicted to be. But, I haven’t researched it incessantly.
Chris:
Terri Schiavo was a vibrant young women, just ask Dr Frist.
Washington:
Yes or no? The US should stop all torture. I don’t think I can be more specific than that.
Washington is prone to pulling a Drumwaster at times, with the ‘you didn’t answer my question’ jazz. karl, you know what I’m talking about? Am I crazy in saying that?
Chris:
I kind of get that feeling as well.
I noticed that Blistercheese is now at the state of saying that conservative policies are great it’s just Bush is not implementing them right.
Personally I think the last 6 years have been bad ideas implemented badly
As for washington, for some reason it is more fun to get him worked up then it is to get right worked up. I think right is an OK guy who kust got in with the wrong crowd in High School, while Washington was the wrong crowd.
Karl:
You get angry because you can’t answer a question. You talk but nothing substantive comes out. When pressed you, like Chris, turn to hyperbole. Oh-as to my posts and your math that is a prime example of not understanding the situation in Iraq-or anywhere-where military forces are engaged. Take a look at the number of deaths and the number of IED’s deployed as reported. You will get the figures that I presented.
You do provide comic relief.
Chris:
You are right-I do say you don’t answer the question because you don’t. I’m not alone in that feeling. Others who visit here say the same. I just comment because I find it amusing that you shout for change but offer no solutions.
As to Operation Swarmer I have posted about it three times with a fourth planned for tommorow. The reason is simple; soldiers are talking about it as being a positive development. It’s not about Bush-it’s about the military. Your one track mind can’t get around that which is rather sad. You are the ONLY liberal I debate on any site that fails to answer the challenge of providing solutions.
BTW – Have a good weekend.
I wrote a couple of posts at Rolling Barrage earlier today, but apparently they haven’t been approved, although others who posted after me were approved.
There’s something to that. Earlier today I responded to someone who commented that I must not have gotten anything out of my military service and that I have a chip on my shoulder. I respond and look back, it disappeared.
I don’t see why comments from regular users have to be moderated, unless control is deemed necessary.
In America, it seems trite.
If my comments are not going to be published, I’d at least like to know that. If could be a snafu, but other people have had subsequent comments put on RB without any problems.
I’d at least like to know what’s going on with my comments. As for moderation, at the most it is ridiculous, at the least a pain in the ass for the reader. Same goes for those “word verifications,” unless you are overwhelemed with spam.
Maybe RB needs a sample of your blood and urine sonicrusk. Have you offered that up yet?
No, but I sent them my fingerprints, ran on a treadmill for endurance, and had my retina scanned. Still, a guy can’t catch a break.
Comments are moderated. At every newspaper in America letters to the editor are moderated-a comment is a letter to the blogowner. On many blogs, and it will only become more so, the amount of spam is far too much. Plus we have a problem that has yet to resolve. I have lost a total of six posts and numerous comments, including those by my best friends.
Sonic: Your comments are always welcomed-it gives everyone a laugh.
Chris:
I wish you would comment more often because you drive home the point that you are a partisan-not a thinker-and it is nice to see others pick up on that…in fact your comments serve to reinforce that critical thinking is not widespread.
Have fun commenting back and forth here… 🙂
I’m not a thinker…I’m glad to have met someone who truly knows how stupid I am. For a couple of years I’ve been trying to prove that to everyone here, but for some reason none of them have had the intestinal fortitude to just ‘give it to me strait’.
Hey, seriously, $4000 and all my baseball cards if you can help to reprogram my mind into something wonderful.