Katrina made security from wars in Afghanistan and Iraq moot points

I know that I'm not the first to say this. And I hope to God that I won't be the last.

It was made PERFECTLY clear that the chief reason for the nation's unpreparednesses to handle the onslaught and the aftermath of Katrina was the fact that so many resources, in both manpower and treasure, were tied up in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Bush bet all of our lives on the notion that our national security HINGED on removing those resources from the United States for redeployment against "credible" threats in the Middle East.

Fact after fact glaringly insisted that those threats are not there... Primarily in Iraq, where the bulk of resources are currently trapped.

If, we had totally concentrated on resolving the Afghanistan issue, without the distractions and diversions to Iraq, we would find ourselves in a much better position today to demobilize forces and equipment there to a level that consists of a maintenance capacity.

Instead, the situation in Afghanistan is not fully resolved. With key members of Al Qaeda and the Taliban unaccounted for and the present Afghan government in its weakened state, the entire infrastructure could collapse under a sustained counter-attack by reconstituted enemy forces.

A disaster that US Forces would find extremely difficult to counteract.

The issues regarding Iraq are long and highly documented, thus are not requiring elaboration. However, the central points are this; Iraq is a war of choice, always has been. There were no valid conditions ever that actually it necessary for the US to invade and occupy that country. I've said that form the beginning and I'll say it until the day I die.

The other central point regarding Iraq is that the precious resources are there and not in the United States, where they could have done the most good. The money was allocated for fighting these wars and not in the US. That money, if properly used to enhance our own infrastructure in the Gulf, as was extrapolated in many ways over the last five years, would have done much more to strengthen our national security posture than any result that was to be gained by a war in Iraq.

No terrorist attack could have inflicted the sheer level of destruction that was wrought by our own lack of preparation for a totally predictable natural event.

And ONLY the federal government has the resources and authority to both coordinate and fund those preparations.

The blame for the horrid conditions of the aftermath lie squarely on the shoulders of those in Washington. The reasons are totally self evident:

Washington cut the legs from under the states, by withholding planning for, resources, coordination, funding and implementation of actions necessary to counter the real threat of natural disaster.

Washington was responsible for fabricating the primary causus belli behind the war against Iraq, a country that posed absolutely no threat against us at all.

Washington is the primary reason with the recovery effort is totally inadequate today, and totally responsible for hindering non-governmental assistance.

Washington is the primary reason that the entire scope of priorities is totally out of order. People died and are dying at this very moment because Washington is concentrated primarily with public relations versus public health and welfare.

Washington's primary excuse for making us unsecure at home was the fact that it was tied up pretending to make us secure in Iraq.


That, in it self, sums up why people died and are dying:

Their blood is on Washington's hands.

:shrug:

with reality, they're are at a loss at what to do next.

that is the reason for the fuck-up in iraq and afghanistan, there entire scheme was based on the populance meekly submitting. now the have no idea what do do other than 'stay the course'

Along with those big holes in their roofs

i came in here to get away from that stuff. my head is exploding.

All I do, I do here

We didn't build all of those bases for nothing