9 years and 4500 Dead Americans

[regular.joe]

What I find interesting in todays world of sound bites is that 100,000 Iraqis have died as a result of the United States. We just took the lid off, to leave it open like that sure makes it sound like U.S. soldiers have been wandering around Iraq killing 100,000 Iraqis. However miss guided we were for going into Iraq; we did, in good conscience, try to keep the lid on a bit tighter then it would have been had we just left in 2003. Most of the killing of Iraqis has been by Iraqis and fighters from foreign countries like Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, etc... I have not really heard this discussed at any length by anyone outside of the military. There certainly is a depth to this topic that cannot be covered in one post in this thread. The dynamic of Shia VS Sunni VS tribe/family/clan VS government power VS foreign influence VS whateverthefuckelseyoucanthinkoftofightabout is amazing in countries like Iraq. What the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld leadership of the day did not get right in any way shape or form was to topple the country and then the very next day hand it over to the general population and say...no need to thank me...here ya go! Even in post WWII Germany/Europe and Japan we set up military governors and city mayors etc that ran and administered the countries and communities until the military administrators were able to leave. In some cases 20 to 30 years later. I for one do not think that what we have gained and what we have lost as a result of invading and occupying Iraq has been or will be worth the results. We will be feeling the pain from this one for years to come.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by JBKlyde

It could have been a whole lot worse..

Originally Posted by regular.joe

What I find interesting in todays world of sound bites is that 100,000 Iraqis have died as a result of the United States. We just took the lid off, to leave it open like that sure makes it sound like U.S. soldiers have been wandering around Iraq killing 100,000 Iraqis...

This is why it wasn't "a whole lot worse", as bad as it was. The vast majority of America's professional soldiers showed remarkable character and competence under horrific conditions.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Griff

The vast majority of America's professional soldiers showed remarkable character and competence under horrific conditions.

No violence and ethnic killings occurred in Mosul while same was ongoing in so many other regions. Petraeus and the 101st Airborne was literally stealing money to institute Phase Four planning in Mosul. As a result, Mosul was completely peaceful. Until the 101st left. Then Phase Four planning stopped. And Mosul became as violent as other Iraqi regions.

From Wikipedia:

This approach can be attributed to Petraeus, who had been steeped in nation-building during his previous tours in nations such as Bosnia and Haiti and thus approached nation-building as a central military mission and who was "prepared to act while the civilian authority in Baghdad was still getting organized …

Meanwhile, Bremer never got organized. Even Bremer had to sneak out of Baghdad on a small airplane because violence Bremer created even threatened his own life.

Gen Petraeus was expelled to a penalty box. Stuck in a war college in Kansas rather than in positions for advancement such as in another combat unit or the Pentagon. He was telling truths that contradicted George Jr’s political agendas. Expelled because he was saying all along why Americans were encouraging so much Iraqi violence and uprising. One man in particular was accurately criticized for causing that violence and resulting deaths. Paul Bremer.

George Jr's chosen man, Bremer - even honored with a Freedom Medal by George Jr - was clearly a major reason why so many Iraqis attacked Americans and other Iraqi ethnic groups. A problem is well defined - 2,500 years ago - in military doctrine. Violence was inevitable when Americans did not do nation building. As soon as Petraeus and the 101st left Mosul in 2004, then entire region broke down into chaos. As military doctrine so clearly says.

Cheney, et al just assumed (due to low intelligence) that as soon as Saddam was gone, then democracy would sprout up from the earth. Why did 100,000 Iraqis die? Because wacko extremists (the right wingers that have low intelligence) said, "America does not do nation building." Suddenly 2,500 years later, that well understood principle is wrong? Only when a political agenda is confused as education and intelligence. America encouraged and enabled violence that killed over 100,000 Iraqis. Iraqis did not die when a General harmed his career by doing nation building. Iraqis died in mass numbers because low intelligence leaders in Washington said, "America does not do nation building."

None of this is new. Read old Cellar posts where reasons for an insurgency and deaths were directly attributed to, "America does not do nation building." The problem was well defined and that obvious that many years ago.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by regular.joe

I have not really heard this discussed at any length by anyone outside of the military.

And you won't. We will get the blame. Some of it is well placed. Much of it is not. Most people never take the time to learn the history of the area but are quick to lay blame on the US.