The Cellar - View Single Post

tw · 05-24-2004, 07:39 PM

Another vehicle bombed. More dead westerners. This one near the secure green zone so that reporters could dare to step out and review the damage. First thing noted by Dexter Filkins of the NY Times (interviewed by the PBS Newshour) is how Iraqis show no remorse for those dead. He is quite blunt about how bad Iraqi attitudes have become in only the last three months. So bad that reporters don't even dare leave or go to a border area where a 'wedding party' is said to have been slaughtered by American helicopters.

About the only thing that the Iraqis and Americans agree on is that Americans attacked something and 40 Iraqis are dead. Something like 80% to 90% of the dead were women and children even though Americans say it was an "insurgant" meeting. Maybe. Maybe some insurgants got married. After all, a large majority of Iraqis dislike Americans.

Why has Iraq turned so bad so fast? It was obvious once we eliminated the rhetoric from the White House and its sound bytes - ie Rush Limbaugh. We had 6 month to get it right. Instead we sent in people so mentally deficient as to even disband the Iraqi Army and Police. And yes I do mean so mentally deficient as to not even learn how a WWII American army avoided same problems in Germany. We fired anyone (out of stupidity and political rhetoric reasons) who could have made the electricity and other utilities work. Why? Only because to have such jobs, they had to be Baath party members. Therefore they were not good enough to make the country work again. (But they were good enough to kill Americans in response).

And so we now come to US elections. Has the administration done a full analysis to get something fixed before November? We consult Bob Woodward. This administration does absolutely no analysis. Somehow a gut feeling is sufficient to make all decisions. Bob Woodward is quite explicity about how George Jr and Co make decisions. That gut feeling says the Iraqi government takes over on 30 June.

Well if Americans are so disliked by virtually the entire Iraqi nation, then we beter just pull out. Obviously, that would be a defeat. So we must first hand over enough power so that any impending disaster will be blamed on others. Is that the smell of Vietnamation - deja vue? Sound like George Jr has his exit strategy.

We force a provisional authority government to be in charge no matter what they say or can do. We leave them with an Army that sets new records for running or refusing to fight - as if the S VietNam army was bad. We try to drop things at the feet of UN officials; declare it is their problem. We failed to get NATO to take this problem off our hands. We blame Chalabi so that if things go bad, he is no longer George Jr's (and Richard Perl's) choosen leader.

In many circles of political reporters, there is much speculation as to how much we will drop and back out - in a hope that others can take blame for any impending disaster or civil war. Iraq has become so bad that even reporters could not go out to confirm military reports since most of 2004. Iraqis that much hate foreign occupiers. Of the 2000 reconstruction projects, only 42 remain ongoing. Things are that bad.

I made a comment about the only few hooligans who ripped down Saddam's statue. Others speculated that most feared to come out only because they feared Saddam even though Americans dominated the streets. Many European towns in WWII did get retaken by the Nazis. It was that dangerous to wave American and British flags when the allies rolled in. And yet those people really did want to be liberated. Those people did flock into the streets. I said then and I say again today - there were few people welcoming the Americans. Marines first arriving in Baghdad said it best. One Baghdad neighborhood would welcome us and the next one would despise us. Neighborhoods would run hot and cold. But more interesting - those Marines entered on the Shi'ite side of Baghdad - among the people that were suppose to most welcome Americans!

That was the reality. If the people really so hated Saddam, then that plaza in Baghdad would have been packed with people now that the Americans were clearly in town. They did not celebrate because .... well we have the facts today. We liberated people who did not want to be liberated - because our president lied.

At least back then some Iraqis welcomed an American liberation. These were widely touted as proof that Americans were loved. Now that number is near zero. This is exactly what happens when a nation is attacked without a 'smoking gun' reason. It looks like we are doomed to make this mistake every 30 years. A Pearl Harbor type attack that was not justified by a declaration of war or a united UN Resolution. ie Somolia - did we not learn even from that trivial operation? This is exactly what happens when leaders lie to the people and the people believe myths such as aluminun tubes for WMDs (even though advanced physics labs said otherwise) and 'rape room' nonsense. What we have is a president who lies mostly because he cannot even be bothered to first learn facts (ie the stupid manned mission to Mars that is not even based upon science). We now have that even from the Bob Woodward book that George Jr says he liked. In hindsight, I doubt the president read Woodward's book. If he did, well then why did he not bother to read the Presidental Daily Bulletin warning explicitly of the WTC attack?

How wrong was the reason for this Iraq war? Amazon.com is doing majore sales because of all the non-political insiders who are telling us facts about George Jr. Damn. Osama bin Laden attacks the WTC. So we leave him alone and go attack Saddam? Add to the published list of critics - Gen Zinni (former commander of Central Command) and Tom Clancy. Look folks. Even a civilian who is well versed in military strategy, tactics, and history - Tom Clancy - is now critical of the mental midget president.

And so this president will start a series of speeches to make his case for Iraq. Will he apologize for making so many mistakes? Really? He could not even apologize for the toruture in Abu Ghradi. Will he admit to any other blunders? That we know he will not. But we suspect he will start a campaign to separate George Jr from the turmoil in Iraq. He must blame others. An exit strategy. All that remains is this question. Upon who will he cast blame?

This is a question that will be asked often. Who is going to get blamed for the turmoil in Iraq?

05-24-2004, 07:39 PM	#1
tw Read? I only know how to write. Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 11,933	Exit Strategy Another vehicle bombed. More dead westerners. This one near the secure green zone so that reporters could dare to step out and review the damage. First thing noted by Dexter Filkins of the NY Times (interviewed by the PBS Newshour) is how Iraqis show no remorse for those dead. He is quite blunt about how bad Iraqi attitudes have become in only the last three months. So bad that reporters don't even dare leave or go to a border area where a 'wedding party' is said to have been slaughtered by American helicopters. About the only thing that the Iraqis and Americans agree on is that Americans attacked something and 40 Iraqis are dead. Something like 80% to 90% of the dead were women and children even though Americans say it was an "insurgant" meeting. Maybe. Maybe some insurgants got married. After all, a large majority of Iraqis dislike Americans. Why has Iraq turned so bad so fast? It was obvious once we eliminated the rhetoric from the White House and its sound bytes - ie Rush Limbaugh. We had 6 month to get it right. Instead we sent in people so mentally deficient as to even disband the Iraqi Army and Police. And yes I do mean so mentally deficient as to not even learn how a WWII American army avoided same problems in Germany. We fired anyone (out of stupidity and political rhetoric reasons) who could have made the electricity and other utilities work. Why? Only because to have such jobs, they had to be Baath party members. Therefore they were not good enough to make the country work again. (But they were good enough to kill Americans in response). And so we now come to US elections. Has the administration done a full analysis to get something fixed before November? We consult Bob Woodward. This administration does absolutely no analysis. Somehow a gut feeling is sufficient to make all decisions. Bob Woodward is quite explicity about how George Jr and Co make decisions. That gut feeling says the Iraqi government takes over on 30 June. Well if Americans are so disliked by virtually the entire Iraqi nation, then we beter just pull out. Obviously, that would be a defeat. So we must first hand over enough power so that any impending disaster will be blamed on others. Is that the smell of Vietnamation - deja vue? Sound like George Jr has his exit strategy. We force a provisional authority government to be in charge no matter what they say or can do. We leave them with an Army that sets new records for running or refusing to fight - as if the S VietNam army was bad. We try to drop things at the feet of UN officials; declare it is their problem. We failed to get NATO to take this problem off our hands. We blame Chalabi so that if things go bad, he is no longer George Jr's (and Richard Perl's) choosen leader. In many circles of political reporters, there is much speculation as to how much we will drop and back out - in a hope that others can take blame for any impending disaster or civil war. Iraq has become so bad that even reporters could not go out to confirm military reports since most of 2004. Iraqis that much hate foreign occupiers. Of the 2000 reconstruction projects, only 42 remain ongoing. Things are that bad. I made a comment about the only few hooligans who ripped down Saddam's statue. Others speculated that most feared to come out only because they feared Saddam even though Americans dominated the streets. Many European towns in WWII did get retaken by the Nazis. It was that dangerous to wave American and British flags when the allies rolled in. And yet those people really did want to be liberated. Those people did flock into the streets. I said then and I say again today - there were few people welcoming the Americans. Marines first arriving in Baghdad said it best. One Baghdad neighborhood would welcome us and the next one would despise us. Neighborhoods would run hot and cold. But more interesting - those Marines entered on the Shi'ite side of Baghdad - among the people that were suppose to most welcome Americans! That was the reality. If the people really so hated Saddam, then that plaza in Baghdad would have been packed with people now that the Americans were clearly in town. They did not celebrate because .... well we have the facts today. We liberated people who did not want to be liberated - because our president lied. At least back then some Iraqis welcomed an American liberation. These were widely touted as proof that Americans were loved. Now that number is near zero. This is exactly what happens when a nation is attacked without a 'smoking gun' reason. It looks like we are doomed to make this mistake every 30 years. A Pearl Harbor type attack that was not justified by a declaration of war or a united UN Resolution. ie Somolia - did we not learn even from that trivial operation? This is exactly what happens when leaders lie to the people and the people believe myths such as aluminun tubes for WMDs (even though advanced physics labs said otherwise) and 'rape room' nonsense. What we have is a president who lies mostly because he cannot even be bothered to first learn facts (ie the stupid manned mission to Mars that is not even based upon science). We now have that even from the Bob Woodward book that George Jr says he liked. In hindsight, I doubt the president read Woodward's book. If he did, well then why did he not bother to read the Presidental Daily Bulletin warning explicitly of the WTC attack? How wrong was the reason for this Iraq war? Amazon.com is doing majore sales because of all the non-political insiders who are telling us facts about George Jr. Damn. Osama bin Laden attacks the WTC. So we leave him alone and go attack Saddam? Add to the published list of critics - Gen Zinni (former commander of Central Command) and Tom Clancy. Look folks. Even a civilian who is well versed in military strategy, tactics, and history - Tom Clancy - is now critical of the mental midget president. And so this president will start a series of speeches to make his case for Iraq. Will he apologize for making so many mistakes? Really? He could not even apologize for the toruture in Abu Ghradi. Will he admit to any other blunders? That we know he will not. But we suspect he will start a campaign to separate George Jr from the turmoil in Iraq. He must blame others. An exit strategy. All that remains is this question. Upon who will he cast blame? This is a question that will be asked often. Who is going to get blamed for the turmoil in Iraq?