Democrats & Liberals Archives

Success in Iraq?

The NYT has an article titled: Inspectors Find Rebuilt Projects Crumbling in Iraq stating that seven out of eight rebuilding projects that the Bush Regime declared as successes were no longer operating.

They only inspected eight projects because the rest were to dangerous to even go back to. In other words they inspected the crème de la crème of projects and almost all of them were failures. So, all of Bush's failures are failures and over 87% of his successes are failures. Failure seems to be endemic in this regime.

As I stated in my article titled Tony Snow is Correct - Sort Of: :

The alternative to withdrawal - is staying. "It's worth walking through the consequences of that position." (Hey - there is nothing wrong with Snow Job's words - he is a good writer.) An unwinnable quagmire is an unwinnable quagmire. To leave our troops pinned down in the middle of a civil war fueled by Iran on one side and Syria on the other side - is pure unadulterated idiocy. It would make more sense to invade Syria and Iran. It would be another unwinnable quagmire, but at least we could engage the actual enemy instead of being (sic) tied up in a burlap bag while he pounds us from the outside. We may wind up doing exactly that. It would make more sense to nuclear glassify the whole region - Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Egypt included. I am not advocating wider war, nor nuclear glassification, but either alternative would be better than to stay in the middle of a civil war fueled by rival regional powers with nothing to lose and with whom we self righteously refuse to talk. Shear idiocy. Pure, plain and simple. When you lose a war, there are consequences. Wars have consequences. "Elections have consequences." In the recent cases, (2000 / 2004), the elections have the consequence of causing us to lose a war. This President lost the war. When you lose a war, your enemies know that you can be beaten and your friends know that they cannot count on you. This is reality. But when you have lost, you have lost. This is reality. To deny that you have lost in order to protect a Presidents "legacy" is only to assure a bigger loss later. Fight to win by all GODDAMN means - but don't fight losing battles for nothing. "Remember the Alamo." That is where this President has led us.

I also said in my article titled: The Democrats Do Not Have a Unified Plan for Iraq

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 (is(sic)) 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,

In spite of the failures and incompetance of this failure regime, there is still a chance for a good outcome, especially if the Dems succeed in forcing policy change on this regime. It now looks as if that is indeed occurring. Rice is meeting with the Syrians and trying to meet with the Iranians. See the NYT article titled: U.S. and Syria Discuss Iraq in Rare Meeting I advocated for this in my articles titled: The Democrats Do Not Have a Unified Plan for Iraq, and Iran has won the war. It is time to sue for peace. The Chatham House report cited in the last article advocates extensively for talks with Syria and Iran. The Chatham house report predates the Iran Study Group report and IMO was far more scholarly, but draws many of the same conclusions.

If we succeed in leaving Iraq better than we found it, the credit belongs (in this order) to our military , (to the Iraqi people (added as an after thought)), to the American people and to the Democrats for forcing policy change on the failure regime. Time lines and or the threat of time lines will pressure the Iraqi government to seek national reconciliation. The Democrats have long called for talks with Syria and Iran and the resignation of Rummy, all of which have played a role in the policy change by the failure regime. The most hopeful sign in Iraq that I have seen is in this NYT article titled: Uneasy Alliance Is Taming One Insurgent Bastion Everything else, even the failure regime's vaunted rebuilding successes are a failure.

I am going to be gone for the weekend, with no internet access. I will not be here to defend myself so have your way with me, but please be gentle. I will read your comments when I get back.

Posted by Ray Guest at May 4, 2007 2:20 PM
Comment #219401
“If we succeed in leaving Iraq better than we found it, the credit belongs (in this order) to our military , (to the Iraqi people (added as an after thought)), to the American people and to the Democrats for forcing policy change on the failure regime.”

Oh, no, no, no, Ray, don’t think so. When we succeed, the credit will go to the military, Bush and the American people. It will be inspite of the dems and the anti-war/Bush crowds. No question about it. The anti-Bushies have painted this “Bush’s War” for years and have done everything in their power to blame him for the mess. So, when success is evident; he will certainly get the credit.

See, this is exactly why many of us have said that the dems/anti-bush/war crowds have “cornered” themselves into a situation where: what’s good for America is bad for them and what’s bad for America is good them. It’s a shame that those people made that choice; however, the choice is made. It’s “Bush’s” war and he will receive the credit he’s due; at the same time, his adversaries (and you know exactly who you are) will be debunked and (dead) wrong. Shame on those who rooted against America in this War b/c you couldn’t stand the President; shame on you!

Posted by: rahdigly at May 4, 2007 6:58 PM
Comment #219406

Nobody “rooted” against America in Iraq, and because Bush made the mistakes (and therefore the mess), he deserves the blame for it.

Because he declined the responsibility for the mistakes, and refused to make the changes necessary to make sure we succeeded in Iraq, he has wasted time, and all of that political currency he talked about after being re-elected.

And that has cost the lives of soldiers.

Posted by: Rocky at May 4, 2007 7:13 PM
Comment #219410

The point is that he made mistakes and he’s been blamed for them; all leaders make mistakes (especially in wars) that cost soldiers lives. However, when success in Iraq is evident, he will receive credit for the success; just as past leaders have received credit for their success in wars (Lincoln, Wilson,FDR,Churchill, etc.)

And, it’s clear that some have made the choice (the wrong choice in IMO) to root against the US and focus solely on Bush’s mistakes and very (very) little of the successes in Iraq; all b/c they hate the President. When we do (indeed) succeed there, they will be the ones that will pay dearly for their comments and choices. That’s a fact!

Posted by: rahdigly at May 4, 2007 7:43 PM
Comment #219416


And, it’s clear that some have made the choice (the wrong choice in IMO) to root against the US and focus solely on Bush’s mistakes and very (very) little of the successes in Iraq; all b/c they hate the President. When we do (indeed) succeed there, they will be the ones that will pay dearly for their comments and choices. That’s a fact!

Thats a fact? So I am assuming you are capable of seeing into the future. Bush could have used your talents before he made the biggest mistake of his life.

This has nothing to with hate for Bush. It has to do with disgust in the wake of irresponsible leadership. I am literally embarased for the man when I see him take his senseless stands out of sheer stubborn stupidity. Imagine how ignorant and apathetic we americans must look to the rest of the world due to the fact that the majority of voters were not bright enough to recognize a not particularly intelligent or capable leader before voting him into office.

Leaving Iraq sometime in the not to distant future is inevitable. We most likely will not leave on favorable terms. Bush’s obstinance serves only to take the lives of more soldiers. And for what. So that we can monitor their civil war and provide security for the oil interests who are heavily investing in Iraqs oil. Give it up Rah. Your rants are old news. Your mission is flawed and you are in a definate minority. It is time to leave that hell hole which we had no valid reason to invade in the first place.

Posted by: ILdem at May 4, 2007 9:03 PM
Comment #219425

Reminds me of stage theater days. We could build an entire city out of canvas, 1x4’s and paint, in just weeks. But, it was all just for the show, and non-functional.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 4, 2007 9:38 PM
Comment #219473


Don’t you hate to say, “I told you so”?


Even the most conservative estimates say our ground forces are stretched to the limit. Even with the “surge” we’re still playing “whack-a-mole” only we’re exposing our troops to a more consistent danger by placing them in less fortified locale’s.

We’re increasing time “in country” and decreasing “down time”. We’re breaking the back of our military (I think we’ve already broken it) and we can’t reinstate the draft and reach modern day training levels in less than eight to twelve months. The lack of troop readiness leaves us horribly vulnerable! (Not to mention how unfair it is that less than one half of one percent of Americans are vested in this f………ed up war)

So, if you really support the troops, and if you really believe this mission is worth pursuing, please write your congressman and demand they reinstate the draft! I have! I’m a “you broke it, you own it” kind of guy.

That’s why I support Biden, he’s the only Democrat with a true alternative plan! Short of that, it’s time to just get the hell out!

Posted by: KansasDem at May 5, 2007 1:55 AM
Comment #219474

“Reminds me of stage theater days.”


That reminds me of a college screenplay I participated in of the “Bridge Over The River Kwai”.

I fought like hell to keep the integrity of the book but I lost and we still had to play out the movie version. It was certainly more dramatic for a central figure to fall upon a detonator!

Which once again makes me wonder why I’ve never seen pictures of jet wreckage at the Pentagon site of 9-11. That was close to the ground. You’d think some wreckage would be visible.

Never mind.

Posted by: KansasDem at May 5, 2007 2:09 AM
Comment #219480


Reminds me of stage theater days.

Perfect David. A simplistic and excellent analogy. Hasn’t the whole six years been mostly stage theater? To actually see positive productive accomplisment come out of government now days would seem quite a novel happening to be honest.

Posted by: ILdem at May 5, 2007 8:50 AM
Comment #219483


“Reminds me of stage theater days.”

Actually this reminds me of an “Our Gang” episode where they are all going to “put on a show”.

I picture Cheney, as played by Spanky, and the Bush’s played by Alfalfa and Darla.

And Alfalfa always sang terribly.

Go figure.

Posted by: Rocky at May 5, 2007 9:33 AM
Comment #219507

Good article, Ray. Calling Bushco the Failure Regime is spot-on.

David, I agree with the others here. Comparing what they’ve done with all the reconstruction money in Iraq with the flimsy constuction of stage sets is a perfect analogy.

Rocky, don’t you think “Our Gang” were more much more talented, creative, honest, and had more of a clue than this Gang of Thugs? Even Petey the
Pitbull seemed more active and engaged in their little productions by comparison.

Posted by: Adrienne at May 5, 2007 2:04 PM
Comment #219680


You are absolutely correct. If things turn around in Iraq, Bush will get the credit - absolutely. Getting the credit and deserving it are two different things. Mistakes are always made in any significant enterprise, certainly in war. But, rahdigly, the wrong war, for the wrong reasons, fought in the wrong way, at too high of a cost, creating more enemies than it kills, strengthening those enemies and weakening us, isolating us from our friends and support, and turning an easy win turned into an uphill fight against overwhelming odds - mistakes - rahdigly. There were mistakes in WWII. Big ones. But it was the right war. At least we sent our troops to were the enemy actually was. Mistakes - rahdigly - please…

Posted by: Ray Guest at May 6, 2007 10:27 PM
Comment #219710

To the rahdiglys on this blog: the feebleness of your efforts to paint those who criticize Bush’s blunders in Iraq as “rooting against the US” is borderline treasonous, and illustrates precisely what is wrong with the chickenhawk far right: obfuscatiing the issue by refusing to hold those who started this ill-conceived war (BushCo) accountable. Well, rahdigy, they ARE accountable. The vast majority of Americans support our troops, and you know that. It is the lunatic in the White House who more and more people do not support - because like you, he has no plan…only the same tired talking points and failed strategies that continue the bloodshed in a war that appears to have no end. Shame on YOU for being blind to the truth.

Posted by: Mr. Magoo at May 7, 2007 11:12 AM
Comment #219716

Mr Magoo,

Thanks for comments.

Posted by: Ray Guest at May 7, 2007 12:34 PM
Comment #220035

Wow, you guys put rahdiglys in his place….I only wish I had come earlier to add some thoughts. Glad to know you’re there.

Posted by: solly at May 10, 2007 6:29 PM
Post a comment