Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Top military officiers: Bush did not adequately prepare for post-war Iraq

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Clarkie1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 10:04 PM
Original message
Top military officiers: Bush did not adequately prepare for post-war Iraq
United Press International
November 18, 2004

WASHINGTON - The Bush Administration did not adequately prepare for the post-war period in Iraq, the nation's top military officers told Congress Wednesday.

http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,FL_plan_111804,00.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
radar Donating Member (447 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 10:07 PM
Response to Original message
1. Uh-Oh
...This could mean another purge; after the CIA is cleared of non-believers first, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stinky The Clown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-19-04 12:10 AM
Response to Reply #1
19. In the case of the military, this is Purge II - The Sequel
Remember Gen Shinseki? (sp?)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CBGLuthier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 10:09 PM
Response to Original message
2. Sorry, just have to say it
Well, Duh. :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flowomo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 10:28 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. and a double-duh from me....
I wouldn't call this "news" -- it's more like redundant affirmation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MSgt213 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 10:11 PM
Response to Original message
3. Bush memo to self: Get of the liberal services chief and that puke from
the FDA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
carolinalady Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 10:12 PM
Response to Original message
4. Finally after Nov2 things said in whispers at the water cooler
are now said out loud!!! Too bad the damage is done. More Iraqi's (sp?) are turning against us everday, yet the "Moral" (I say that loosely) majority think we are right on track. I only hope we survive to 2008 to kick their azz. Sorry for the pessimism tonight.
Sometimes the frustration level just exceeds the coping levels, and I love having you guys to vent to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ceusi Donating Member (27 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 10:26 PM
Response to Original message
5. I'm so confused
Is post-war, like, anytime SOON?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alcuno Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 10:47 PM
Response to Reply #5
13. Welcome to DU, ceusi.
As far as anybody knows, this thing could just be getting started. The average insurgency lasts for about TWELVE years!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sr_pacifica Donating Member (775 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #5
16. That's what I was thinking n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newyawker99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-19-04 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #5
25. Hi ceusi!!
Welcome to DU!! :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
astroboy Donating Member (46 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 10:27 PM
Response to Original message
6. now they tell us
thanks boyz :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OldLeftieLawyer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 10:29 PM
Response to Original message
8. Wait, wait, wait
I find this VERY suspicious.

Why are they saying this now?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BRLIB Donating Member (347 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 10:31 PM
Response to Original message
9. He needs to be purged like the CIA and made to be aware
that bu** is the god of all gods and the master of all masters and that since bu** has never made a mistake, all mistakes must be his! And he should repent to bush the almighty and ask for forgiveness and mercy!


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radar Donating Member (447 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 10:50 PM
Response to Reply #9
14. If we're lucky....
...Bush'll get started immediately; ala Joe MacCarthy attacking the military in the 50's.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAmccarthy.htm

"...The senate investigations into the United States Army were televised and this helped to expose the tactics of Joseph McCarthy. One newspaper, the Louisville Courier-Journal, reported that: "In this long, degrading travesty of the democratic process, McCarthy has shown himself to be evil and unmatched in malice." Leading politicians in both parties, had been embarrassed by McCarthy's performance and on 2nd December, 1954, a censure motion condemned his conduct by 67 votes to 22...."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marew Donating Member (854 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 10:32 PM
Response to Original message
10. What a surprise....NOT!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 10:42 PM
Response to Original message
11. *snarf*! The guy can't dress himself when he gets up in the afternoon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wicket Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 10:47 PM
Response to Original message
12. Bush stomps his foot and screams, "NO FAIR! I WANT A DO-OVER!"
:nopity:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leesa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 11:06 PM
Response to Original message
15. FU aholes. It's an illegal immoral, UNPROVOKED invasion of a disarmed
nation. WHAT kind of crap military people do we have. Do they have NO honor whatsoever?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sr_pacifica Donating Member (775 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 11:31 PM
Response to Original message
17. Hey, look at this part from the article:
"The post-war period in Iraq -- which has been 10 times more deadly for U.S. forces than the war was -- is not going to be "won" with bullets, Schoomaker told Congress. It will be won by convincing Iraqis that their best interests lie in working hand-in-hand with U.S. forces to build a stable country."

I think they blew the chances of working "hand-in-hand" with U.S. forces. After all the killing?...

And then:

"This ultimately is not going to be won in the kinetic sense, in the battle. This is going to be won by Iraqis investing their own personal sweat and blood in the solution," Schoomaker said.

I think they already HAVE been investing their blood.

Article excerpts from:
http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,FL_plan_111


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shraby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 11:59 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. How many times do they repeat the
Edited on Fri Nov-19-04 12:00 AM by shraby
same old same old. "They didn't plan for the peace" It's getting to be a worn out statement. I have something to tell them.
THERE WILL BE NO PEACE AS LONG AS WE KEEP KILLING AND THEY KEEP BLOWING THINGS UP WITH THE EXPLOSIVES WE LET THEM STEAL.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynnTheDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-19-04 12:16 AM
Response to Original message
20. Our troops were rushed into "spreading democracy" without enuf RIFLES.
Without enough BULLETS. And body armor. And food. And water. And armored humvees. And nightvision goggles. And scopes. And vital equipment parts. And and and.

And our troops STILL don't have enough RIFLES adn AMMO.

bush didn't adequately plan for WAR, let alone "post-war", whenever that happens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chicagojoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-19-04 02:49 AM
Response to Original message
21. Why does Bush still have his head?!?!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MurrayDelph Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-19-04 03:11 AM
Response to Original message
22. the top brass then went on to announce
that water is wet, ice is cold, and fire is hot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-19-04 04:06 AM
Response to Original message
23. there's not going to be a post-war Iraq,
there's not going to be post-war anything.
Because the war will be perpetual, if it's up to the Neocons - and it sure looks like it will be up to them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proudbluestater Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-19-04 07:57 AM
Response to Original message
24. State Department Had a Plan, Neocons tossed it out
Edited on Fri Nov-19-04 08:08 AM by proudbluestater
Colin Powell offered a lenghty proposal, something like 17 chapters, in booklike form. It was promptly tossed in the garbage. Everything that is going on now was fully predicted by the department of state. So what happens in this new world order? The only sane one, the one who called the neocons "fucking crazies" is gone and the fucking crazies are left to run the asylum.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/6285256.htm?1c


The Pentagon planning group, directed by Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith, the department's No. 3 official, included hard-line conservatives who had long advocated using the American military to overthrow Saddam. Its day-to-day boss was William Luti, a former Navy officer who worked for Vice President Dick Cheney before joining the Pentagon.

The Pentagon group insisted on doing it its way because it had a visionary strategy that it hoped would transform Iraq into an ally of Israel, remove a potential threat to the Persian Gulf oil trade and encircle Iran with U.S. friends and allies. The problem was that officials at the State Department and CIA thought the vision was badly flawed and impractical, so the Pentagon planners simply excluded their rivals from involvement.

Feith, Luti and their advisers wanted to put Ahmad Chalabi - the controversial Iraqi exile leader of a coalition of opposition groups - in power in Baghdad. The Pentagon planners were convinced that Iraqis would warmly welcome the American-led coalition and that Chalabi, who boasted of having a secret network inside and outside the regime, and his supporters would replace Saddam and impose order.

Feith, in a series of responses Friday to written questions, denied that the Pentagon wanted to put Chalabi in charge.

But Pentagon adviser Richard Perle, who at the time was the chairman of the Defense Policy Board - an influential group of outside advisers to the Pentagon - and is close to Feith and Luti, acknowledged in an interview that installing Chalabi was the plan.

Referring to the Chalabi scenario, Perle said: "The Department of Defense proposed a plan that would have resulted in a substantial number of Iraqis available to assist in the immediate postwar period." Had it been accepted, "we'd be in much better shape today," he said.


The failure to consult more widely on what to do if the Chalabi scenario failed denied American planners the benefits of a vast reservoir of expertise gained from peacekeeping and reconstruction in shattered nations from Bosnia to East Timor.

Perle said blame for any planning failures belonged to the State Department and other agencies that opposed the Chalabi route.

A senior administration official, who requested anonymity, said the Pentagon officials were enamored of Chalabi because he advocated normal diplomatic relations with Israel. They believed that would have "taken off the board" one of the only remaining major Arab threats to Israeli security.

Moreover, Chalabi was key to containing the influence of Iran's radical Islamic leaders in the region, because he would have provided bases in Iraq for U.S. troops. That would complete Iran's encirclement by American military forces around the Persian Gulf and U.S. friends in Russia and Central Asia, he said.

But the failure to consult more widely on what to do if the Chalabi scenario failed denied American planners the benefits of a vast reservoir of expertise gained from peacekeeping and reconstruction in shattered nations from Bosnia to East Timor.

As one example, the Pentagon planners ignored an eight-month-long effort led by the State Department to prepare for the day when Saddam's dictatorship was gone. The "Future of Iraq" project, which involved dozens of exiled Iraqi professionals and 17 U.S. agencies, including the Pentagon, prepared strategies for everything from drawing up a new Iraqi judicial code to restoring the unique ecosystem of Iraq's southern marshes, which Saddam's regime had drained.

Virtually none of the "Future of Iraq" project's work was used once Saddam fell.

The first U.S. administrator in Iraq, retired Lt. Gen. Jay Garner, wanted the Future of Iraq project director, Tom Warrick, to join his staff in Baghdad. Warrick had begun packing his bags, but Pentagon civilians vetoed his appointment, said one current and one former official.

Meanwhile, postwar planning documents from the State Department, CIA and elsewhere were "simply disappearing down the black hole" at the Pentagon, said a former U.S. official with long Middle East experience who recently returned from Iraq.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 11:17 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC