Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Status of Iraq

One Man's opinion, but look at the man's credentials.

An artifle in USA Today summarizes a paper by a former US Army officer who was an aid to the Secretary of Defense. See: http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2008/04/ex-rumsfeld-dep.html

Article:

Ex-Rumsfeld deputy describes Iraq as 'major debacle'
The Iraq war has turned into a "major debacle," a former Pentagon official writes in a report published by the National Defense University in Washington.

"Measured in blood and treasure, the war in Iraq has achieved the status of a major war and a major debacle," Joseph Collins writes at the beginning of his 60-page article.

Collins, a retired Army colonel, served as a senior DoD official under Paul Wolfowitz and Donald Rumsfeld.

Among the conclusions he reaches in Choosing War: The Decision to Invade Iraq and Its Aftermath:

Globally, U.S. standing among friends and allies has fallen. Our status as a moral leader has been damaged by the war, the subsequent occupation of a Muslim nation, and various issues concerning the treatment of detainees. At the same time, operations in Iraq have had a negative impact on all other efforts in the war on terror, which must bow to the priority of Iraq when it comes to manpower, materiel, and the attention of decisionmakers. Our Armed Forces�especially the Army and Marine Corps�have been severely strained by the war in Iraq. Compounding all of these problems, our efforts there were designed to enhance U.S. national security, but they have become, at least temporarily, an incubator for terrorism and have emboldened Iran to expand its influence throughout the Middle East. As this case study is being written, despite impressive progress in security during the surge, the outcome of the war is in doubt.

... To date, the war in Iraq is a classic case of failure to adopt and adapt prudent courses of action that balance ends, ways, and means. After the major combat operation, U.S. policy has been insolvent, with inadequate means for pursuing ambitious ends. It is also a case where the perceived illegitimacy of our policy has led the United States to bear a disproportionate share of the war�s burden. U.S. efforts in Iraq stand in stark contrast to the war in Afghanistan, where, to the surprise of many, U.S. friends and allies have recently taken up a larger share of the burden of that conflict. Afghanistan has become the North Atlantic Treaty Organization�s (NATO�s) war, but the war in Iraq has increasingly become only a U.S. and Iraqi struggle.

... The central finding of this study is that U.S. efforts in Iraq were hobbled by a set of faulty assumptions, a flawed planning effort, and a continuing inability to create security conditions in Iraq that could have fostered meaningful advances in stabilization, reconstruction, and governance. It is arguable whether the Iraqis will develop the wherewithal to create ethnic reconciliation and build a coherent national government. It is clear, however, that the United States and its partners have not done enough to create conditions in which such a development could take place. With the best of intentions, the United States toppled a vile, dangerous regime but has been unable to replace it with a stable entity. Mistakes in the Iraq operation cry out for improvements in the U.S. decisionmaking and policy execution systems. In turn, these improvements will require major changes in the legislative and executive branches, as well as in interagency processes.

McClatchy Newspapers, the first to report on this article, says Collins goes on to blame his former bosses for many of the problems at the outset of hostilities. He writes that "senior national security officials exhibited in many instances an imperious attitude, exerting power and pressure where diplomacy and bargaining might have had a better effect," according to McClatchy.

...he must hate America.

Things are going great over there.

- We've given Al Maliki's govt the chance at setting up a Democratically elected Muslim govt who can freely elect which leader will hate us the most.

- Deaths are way down because of our brilliant strategy of paying insurgents millions per month to not fight.

- Iraq will finally be able to begin paying for some of it's own reconstruction as they charge the US military record high amounts for their oil.


...just really burns me to see these un-American cowards question our government's policies. Bunch of cut-n-runners.

Uhhhh. I think I agree with you.

Fife's book blaims everything on Collin Powell, guess Wolfowitz's book will blaim Jimmy Carter or maybe Jefferson Davis.

more trators from tosay's ABC Poll:

Given these options -- "Do you think the United States should keep its military forces in Iraq until civil order is restored there, even if that means continued U.S. military casualties" or "Do you think the United States should withdraw its military forces from Iraq in order to avoid further U.S. military casualties, even if that means civil order is not restored there?" -- 56 percent chose withdrawal, compared to 41 percent who think the troops should stay

Better yet, blame George Washington. He started the whole thing. If he had not led the fight to win independence from the Crown, Iraq would be a British problem. Of course, we'd have some troops there since we'd be a colonial force.

The constitution vests the power of declaring war in Congress; therefore no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they shall have deliberated upon the subject and authorized such a measure.
~George Washington

My first wish is to see this plague of mankind, war, banished from the earth.
~George Washington

What he says is true. But he's not telling the whole truth. Half the truth doesn't tell the whole story. If he deliberately ignores the positives that have manifested from the war - and there are many - then he is persuing an agenda which can only survive half the truth.

Dan

name 'em.

You'd ignore them if I did.

I suggest you read something, pretty much anything VDH has written in the last few years. You won't. It's easier to speak from a platform of half-truths.

Dan

An excerpt from the "Surge On" article I posted about a week ago. Think outside the box, trips!



....."Some people charge that we have merely "rented" the Sunni tribesmen, the former insurgents who now fight by our side. This implies that because we pay these people, their loyalty must be for sale to the highest bidder. But as Gen. Petraeus demonstrated in Nineveh province in 2003 to 2004, many of the Iraqis who filled the ranks of the Sunni insurgency from 2003 into 2007 could have been working with us all along, had we treated them intelligently and respectfully. In Nineveh in 2003, under then Maj. Gen. Petraeus's leadership, these men � many of them veterans of the Iraqi army � played a crucial role in restoring civil order. Yet due to excessive de-Baathification and the administration's attempt to marginalize powerful tribal sheiks in Anbar and other provinces � including men even Saddam dared not ignore � we transformed potential partners into dreaded enemies in less than a year.

Then al Qaeda in Iraq, which helped fund and tried to control the Sunni insurgency for its own ends, raped too many women and boys, cut off too many heads, and brought drugs into too many neighborhoods. By outraging the tribes, it gave birth to the Sunni "awakening." We � and Iraq � got a second chance. Powerful tribes in Anbar province cooperate with us now because they came to see al Qaeda for what it is � and to see Americans for what we truly are.

Soldiers everywhere are paid, and good generals know it is dangerous to mess with a soldier's money. The shoeless heroes who froze at Valley Forge were paid, and when their pay did not come they threatened to leave � and some did. Soldiers have families and will not fight for a nation that allows their families to starve. But to say that the tribes who fight with us are "rented" is perhaps as vile a slander as to say that George Washington's men would have left him if the British offered a better deal......"

There's much more to learn from the article and a guy who has been there from start to the current day!

We're doing exceedingly well and surpassing expectations of over a year ago and it just seems to piss off some of you whiners.

not me, I ain't pizzed, I'd love to see them succeed.


but I remain skeptical.


course the definition of success will vary by individual I suppose.

is there a plan in place for the treasury of Iraq to reimburse us for our costs there? or are they strapped just to do their own rebuilding and continued building of infrastructure?

anyone know?

it'd be great if we truly end up with an even semi democratic Iraq as an ally for our help.

still I'm from the Show-Me state.

and Bill Clinton was always popular, too. so?

Bet the percentages would flip if you limited the vote to people who can find Iraq on a map.

Well most people can't find Iraq on a map but they know how to find a filling station. LOL

Multi-National Force-Iraq website:

http://www.mnf-iraq.com/

Ya might just learn something....and pass it along.
Sako

Methinks If It Flies It Dies left too soon. If he'd stuck around a bit longer, he'd feel right at home these days.