The Cellar - View Single Post

headsplice · 06-15-2005, 02:09 PM

Jeez...I leave the thread for 24 hours and there are more posts than I can reasonably respond to. So, I'm going to try and respond cogently to as much as I can (okay, to what I want to).
My first problem is the way that the war was justified, is prosecuted and continues coveys the message to the world is the ends justify the means. That is not an acceptable foreign policy. It is ultimately self-destructive. The United States is supposed to be the 'shining beacon on the hill.' Instead, we're the searchlight at the gulag. Terrific.
More specifically, the justifications for the war were twisted, folded, mutilated, and spindled to fit ideological goals. Yes, there were non-WMD reasonings for invading Iraq. But frankly, none of them mattered. None of them gave the US any legal basis for the invasion of a sovereign nation.
Further, the prosecution of the war was completely deluded. Rumsfeld overrode his generalss recommendations for overwhelming numbers. There weren't enough 'civil' soldiers (folks who could speak the native languages, MP's/police, Corp of Engineers, etc). The State Department's post-action planning was completely ignored. For example, no military units occupied or even protected hospitals, power stations or sub-stations, or other vital, civilian locations (like the museums). Why not? If you, as an invader and aren't planning on rebuilding the country from the ground up, those are critical sectors of administration that were left to be looted and rendered useless.
Ultimately, all of this points out something fundamental: tremendous political ability (i.e., they're great at spin) but horrible management.
So, back to my original question. Why is no one in the mainstream pointing this out?

06-15-2005, 02:09 PM	#45
headsplice Relaxed Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Minneapolis Posts: 676	Jeez...I leave the thread for 24 hours and there are more posts than I can reasonably respond to. So, I'm going to try and respond cogently to as much as I can (okay, to what I want to). My first problem is the way that the war was justified, is prosecuted and continues coveys the message to the world is the ends justify the means. That is not an acceptable foreign policy. It is ultimately self-destructive. The United States is supposed to be the 'shining beacon on the hill.' Instead, we're the searchlight at the gulag. Terrific. More specifically, the justifications for the war were twisted, folded, mutilated, and spindled to fit ideological goals. Yes, there were non-WMD reasonings for invading Iraq. But frankly, none of them mattered. None of them gave the US any legal basis for the invasion of a sovereign nation. Further, the prosecution of the war was completely deluded. Rumsfeld overrode his generalss recommendations for overwhelming numbers. There weren't enough 'civil' soldiers (folks who could speak the native languages, MP's/police, Corp of Engineers, etc). The State Department's post-action planning was completely ignored. For example, no military units occupied or even protected hospitals, power stations or sub-stations, or other vital, civilian locations (like the museums). Why not? If you, as an invader and aren't planning on rebuilding the country from the ground up, those are critical sectors of administration that were left to be looted and rendered useless. Ultimately, all of this points out something fundamental: tremendous political ability (i.e., they're great at spin) but horrible management. So, back to my original question. Why is no one in the mainstream pointing this out? __________________ Don't Panic