April 10, 2006
The Democrats Do Not Have a Unified Plan for Iraq
Republicans create an impossible mess with no good answers and then want to criticise the Dems for not having a unified answer. How exactly are we supposed to have a unified answer for a problem that has no good answers? We don’t know what to do. Well, we have a plan - I guess, but it is not really a plan, plan. See: Democratic Plan.
A lot of us have good ideas - but no consensus. That is the whole point. This incompetent president has led us into a no-win situation.
We went to war for the wrong reasons. We went to war in the wrong way. We fought the war in the wrong way. We managed Iraq in the wrong way after we "won." We iced out international partners that could have helped. And now there is little doubt that we will leave Iraq in the wrong way. There is no "right way" to leave Iraq.
The best metaphor that I can think of for this Republican created mess is: You meet a women. You seduce her with vows to love, honor, and cherish until the end of time. She enters a deep psychosis and you dump her. Except in this case we date raped Iraq to begin with (Rumsfeld's idea of seduction) - no wonder she is nuts. We probably do need to leave her - she'll kill us if we don't. But she will stalk us if we do. It is a mess. There is no good answer. The divorce will be expensive and ugly. She is going to take all of our treasure. But what are we going to do? Our friends tried to tell us to stay away from her... They said she was nothing but trouble... But we had to listen to our "little head" (Bush) - (he has the brains of a penis) - (some vulgar person might say dickhead) - (and the Downing Street Memo proves that he was certainly hot for her).
We went to war for the wrong reasons:
I actually cannot support this assertion. I cannot support it because we really do not know why we went to war. We know that Bush / Cheney / Rumsfeld were in a headlong rush to war from the very start of the Bush regime. We know that they were not straight with the American people. (Maybe that is why they are so "freaked out" by gays - because they are not "straight" - sorry - couldn't resist the play on words - anyhow...) We know that they cherry picked intelligence and played games with the UN and the UN inspectors... Maybe Baby Bush wanted to "show up" his daddy... Maybe the reason's were idiotic idea-logic... Maybe the reasons were geopolitical oil politics and war profiteering... Maybe there was a good reason (probably not)... We just don't know. We know that the real reasons were not presented to the American people. We sent our beloved sons and daughters to die in far off lands on the basis of lies - for reasons unknown.
We went to war in the wrong way:
In the commentary thread to Jack's article titled, "The good guys are winning in Iraq" which he posted on 10-21-05, I wrote:
The problem is this: This worthless #$^%%# dry drunk piece of $%^$## incompetent commander and chief is rapidly creating a situation where we cannot win. As listed above the American people were not adequately prepared to make the sacrifices necessary to win. The American people are losing patience with the war and will soon demand our withdrawal. We went in without enough troops.
To that I would add that, as a result of our refusal to allow the UN inspectors to finish their work - because we already had a date penciled in to start bombing - we failed to build a real coalition. We sent our troops in without enough armor. We had a great plan for war, but no plan for peace. Well our great plan worked. We have got war.
We fought the war in the wrong way:
In the same commentary thread from Jack's article listed above, I wrote:
We disbanded the Iraqi army there by leaving weapons all over the country for insurgents and creating millions of unemployed disaffected young men. We gave no-bid contracts to Haliburton instead of employing Iraqis. Bush either knew or should have known about the torture in Abu Ghireb. The list is just endless.
It is possible that we will still have a good outcome in Iraq in spite of the incompetence, lies and amorality of this corrupt administration... however if we do have a good outcome, 100% of the credit belongs to the courageous American soldiers and to the noble intentions of the American people who may win this in spite of President King George the Second. It steadily becoming increasingly unlikely… less troops then the Generals wanted, Rumsfeld setting the preconditions for torture at Abu Ghireb and Gitmo, failing to train Iraqi security forces fast enough, disbanding the Iraqi Army, giving no bid contracts to Haliburton instead of local Iraqi contractors, failing to rebuild, failing to create a real coalition, lies, lies and more lies, and on and on,
We managed Iraq in the wrong way after we "won."
Of coarse this overlaps with; no-bid contracts, disbanding the Iraqi Army, AbuGhireb, not enough body armor, and not enough troops, but I would add: Micro-managing the war by political civilian leadership (Rumsfeld), for political civilian reasons, that prevented the military from making the necessary strategic and force adjustments to deal with the mess that we sent them into. The same mistake we made in Vietnam... If you are going to tell the Generals to fight a war - you need to take the "gloves off" and let them fight it. Bush does a good job of giving lip service to this idea, but the reality is quite different. For example, they did not send in enough troops because of the political ramifications. They needed to convince the American people that it would be quick, cheap, and easy. In reality, competent leaders, if they were going to lead us to war, would have done the exact opposite. They would have prepared the American people by explaining in detail that it would or could be long, extremely costly, and painful. But the American people would not have supported the truth so they micro-managed the military for political purposes - and they got their war - and now our sons and daughters are dying in far lands on the basis of lies, for reasons unknown.
We iced out international partners that could have helped.
Even after the war, we could have gotten France, Germany, and Russia to support the rebuilding of Iraq, but we wanted all of the plunder for Haliburton, so we iced them out of the rebuilding contracts. God, we could use them now - but now - it is too late. We wanted the plunder - instead - our treasure is being plundered. Senator Joe Biden still thinks that it would possible to get regional powers to participate int he stabilization of Iraq - but it won't happen until we have "regime change" in Washington DC. See: Biden Video./
And now there is little doubt that we will leave Iraq in the wrong way.
Bush is already drawing troops out. Iraq is descending into civil war, and he is drawing the troops out. And... he is probably right... as mentioned above - I don't know what to do - but it is obvious that he is drawing them out for political reasons - because the war is unpopular - which is the wrong reason. We need competent leadership, like Biden, Murtha, or Weasley Clark
Forget about exit strategy or reasons for going to war. If you are going to invade a country why in the world would you give the country back to the people you invaded? I have never understood this concept. Don’t wage war if you your intent was never to WIN the war in the first place! We have never been a “first strike nation” since we are now than the American Flag should be waving in the countries we occupy. No one elses. Isn’t that what war is all about?
Posted by: bud at April 10, 2006 06:25 PMGood post, Ray! :o)
Sick comment, Bud. :o(
(Still, thanks for proving my point about Conservatives and Conservatism.)
Thanks Betty
Bud
This is only my second article posted on Watchblog and you were my first commenter. You were my “first” - I will always remember you. Assuming your comment is serious and not “tongue in cheek” humor… We cannot afford to fight wars of conquest and fly the American flag - not unless we want to be as brutal as the Romans, Saddam, the Soviets, and the Nazis, and genocidally crush all resistance. Good luck with that. It worked well for the Soviets and Hitler. Their empires will last for a long time… OH wait, they are gone. They are all gone.
Democrats should have rallied around the Murtha plan. Asking the Iraqi’s to vote on whether or not they want us there is as arrogant as NOT asking them if they wanted us to invade.
Posted by: Thom Houts at April 10, 2006 10:00 PMNice piece, Ray.
Btw, are you the guy who usually posts as “ray”?
I’m with Thom, we should rally around Murtha’s plan. He has the right ideas about what we need to do, and he knows it isn’t fair to make our troops fight Iraq’s civil war.
The righties who comment here may be interested to know that General Odom who is a Republican, and was the former National Security Agency director under Reagan, thinks Murtha is right.
It’s been said before, how can someone who has never seen action(or even finished his training) know how to win or even fight a war? It was even stated on national TV that this is an unwinable war. And those of us who continue to say that we shouldn’t even be there are called traitors. We didn’t get us into this war, Bush and Company did, and they don’t even believe its winable, but we’re the traitors. Go figure. It has been from the start lets not listen to those that have been there done that, lets listen to someone who I owe something to, that can stand to make 100’s of millions of dollars on someone else’s misery. Lets not give a contract to the most qualified, lets give it to one of daddies friends. Piss poor way to do business. If a CEO of a company ran it the way he has run our country he’d have been on his ass. Unless of course you know someone who owes you a favor.
Posted by: Sherri at April 11, 2006 12:01 AMTo Betty and Ray.
My compliments. You both got the point. America does not do “first strike” scenarios very well. Nor should we! This is not about me being Liberal or Conservative (although I go both ways)it’s about not starting something you can not finish! Again, war is brutal Betty how could it not be? That is why we had no business starting one! My point is simple. If you are going to invade another country, don’t carry signs that say “Just Visiting”. You either win or go home.
WE NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN THERE IN THE FIRST &*()^%$ PLACE!
I’m just wondering, bud, as someone who admittedly can go lib or con, where were you in January 2003? If everyone who NOW knows it was a stupid &*()^%$ idea in the first place held that opinion THEN, we would’t even be there.
Posted by: Thom Houts at April 11, 2006 05:42 AMAdrienne,
Yes, at first I started posting comments here as Ray then noticed that someone else was using Ray so I declared myself to be forever after, Ray G. and now I have come completely out of the closet, and admitted that my whole real name is Ray Guest. This timidness relates also to Thom Houts last comment. I was opposed to this war from the start, but the Bush Regime had, with the complicity of the mass media, whipped this country up into such a hyper-patriotic war fervor that I was cowed into silence. I quietly mentioned my concerns to a few close friends, and I quietly went to one small quiet candle vigil war protest. I should have been screaming in the streets. I should have been writing letters to the editor. I should been writing my representatives. I should have been writing on Watchblog. But I was cowed into silence. My stones simply were not big enough to stand up and fight populist popular opinion when my country needed me. Bush is an idiot or an evil genius, but this war is my fault and the fault of others like me.
Posted by: Ray Guest at April 11, 2006 09:34 AM“To that I would add that, as a result of our refusal to allow the UN inspectors to finish their work”
Ray,
Remember Hans Blix? Maybe “bastards” was the right word after all.
In an interview in London’s Guardian newspaper, Blix said: “I have my detractors in Washington. There are bastards who spread things around, of course, who planted nasty things in the media, not that I cared very much.”
Blix went on to say, “I think one has to be cautious in making use of the armed forces on flimsy or shaky grounds that it has justification.”
That “blast from the past” comes from 6/12/03:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/06/12/blix.interview.cnna/
I remember Blix virtually pleading for more time but that’s all history now.
KansasDem
Posted by: KansasDem at April 11, 2006 12:50 PMRay:
“I should have been screaming in the streets. I should have been writing letters to the editor. I should been writing my representatives. I should have been writing on Watchblog. But I was cowed into silence. My stones simply were not big enough to stand up and fight populist popular opinion when my country needed me.”
Better late than never, Ray. The way I see it, your country still needs you, and it isn’t ever too late to make a difference until your too old to try.
“Bush is an idiot or an evil genius,”
IMO, Bush is an idiot and a puppet for other diabolical Neocon “geniuses” — Cheney, Rove, Wolfowitz, Perle, etc. etc.
You know, all the ‘Project for the New American Century’ clowns.
“but this war is my fault and the fault of others like me.”
Ray, I’m one of those people who have been in the streets, and writing letters to Congress, and to newspapers, and in blogs like this one from the beginning, but not for a minute do I think that if everyone who was publicly or privately against the Iraq war had done the same would it have made any difference at all. No, unfortunately I believe that this administration was determined to do whatever they wanted to do no matter how much protest we had made — and the GOP majority in Congress would have let them.
Posted by: Adrienne at April 11, 2006 03:31 PMI was opposed to this war from the start, but the Bush Regime had, with the complicity of the mass media, whipped this country up into such a hyper-patriotic war fervor that I was cowed into silence. I quietly mentioned my concerns to a few close friends, and I quietly went to one small quiet candle vigil war protest. I should have been screaming in the streets.
Don’t worry, Ray: I’ve got the Screaming In The Streets pretty well covered…
:o)
But (as usual), it’s what Adrienne said: you are Most Welcome. Remember, John Kerry and many others were bamboozled. If we can gain enough people being exposed to the Truth before the Noo-kew-lur War With Canada begins, I’ll consider it a victory for the American Way.
ALL - I love your comments. Bush probably does have a plan for “Noo-kew-lur War With Canada” - Quebec anyway. Every idiot gun slingin Texican knows them Frenchies need killin. We need to liberate Canada from them. And then we need to teach the rest of the Canadians to speak english eh. I got nothing against gun slingin Texans, but the idiot has got to go.
Posted by: Ray Guest at April 12, 2006 11:12 AMHTML Formatting Tips:
<strong>bold text</strong>
<em>italicize text</em>
<u>underline text</u>
<strike>strike text</strike>
<a href="http://domain.com/link">link text</a>
<blockquote>quote text</blockquote>
By clicking the "Post" button you agree to abide by the Rules For Participation.
