Major Concession
 

A recent GAO report only repeated what the military must have known long ago. We will not have enough troops, with rotation, to maintain the occupation of Iraq beyond next March. The Joint Cheifs have been saying this for some time (without giving a date). UN members have long known this and have left the US to stew in its own juices. They were right. This president assumed the US would be welcome. Guess what. It is now so bad everywhere in Iraq that even the press reports combined with all these other inputs finally got the attention of George Jr.

Ron Nordland reporting for PBS said he saw the change occur over a three week period. He watched US troops become part of a problem that was only getting worse over the past three months. And since those troops did not even speak the language, they did not understand why things kept getting worse. Did not understand that they were only making things worse and encouraging widespread violence. Currently, every US troop that returns from Iraq will now be examined carefully by a psychiatrist on return because the situation over there has become that stressful.

A major concession to the UN, a special olive branch handed to the French, some sort of special consideration to Putin of Russia, etc are all in process. Even right wing Republican extremists are conceding that we need the UN and that an active UN is in America's interest. This is a complete reversal of right wing rhetoric - as you Rush Limbaugh listeners must acknowledge.

We are losing ten seriously wounded troops every day. We have lost more since this president declared the war over compared to what were lost during the entire original war. We have lost more troops than in the previous Gulf war because the administration is more interested in their agenda than in current realities.

We have not even covered the costs. NASA with ISS, space shuttles, and deep space exploration, does it on a budget of $13 billion. This war, without including capital expenditures and not including any rebuilding, will cost $400+ billion this year and $500 billion next year. Even these figures are still considered mythical by many Democratic and Republican Congressmen.

The EPA superfund is only $50million. Why is Iraq more important? Too late to ask. A lying president got us into the quagmire. The American standard of living must suffer as a result. America unemployed has increased every year now for past three Labor Days - even with record deficients to stimulate the economy. But since rhetoric says that should not happen, then clearly it is not. Denial with propaganda so that you too will deny.

We are spending somewhere around $25,000 every year to liberate Iraqis who universally want one thing - for Americans to leave. Some work for this objective by cooperating. Some by violence. But the bottom line is that we attacked a nation that had no weapons of mass destruction, we lied, and forced a liberation on Iraq that did not want it.

What is worse is how we have screwed up the post war recovery - with Rumsfeld openly declaring no violence in a country that was tearing itself apart. Our leaders refused to beleive all this would happen and refused to acknoledge that it was happening. All this violence is contrary to their agenda - realities be damned.

Saddam could get water and elecricity running in one month. But since this administration is so bull headed about not sending more troops, we have troops not trained to accomplish tasks that are required - even to get the utilities working.

Don't forget about Afghanistan. Same problem. We still have not even provided basic services that the Taliban had no problem providing. In many places, basic water systems still don't work. These are the ticking time bombs that create VietNam scenarios. These are the ticking time bombs that this administration has finally conceded.

Bottom line. The military needed many more troops. They said it would take 200,000 for up to five years. Rumsfled and company said that was rediculous. Look who was correct. As a result, that 200,000 number is too small. But this mental midget presidency is finally conceding to what everyone else knew long ago. Even the GAO could see what an MBA continued to deny - until today. Major concessions today by this administration.

A solider who is there and doesn't speak the language doesn't understand the situation.

tw, who is here and doesn't speak the language, but listens to reporters who don't speak the language, feels he understands it with precision.

Sure.

Yes, we are in a bit of trouble but...
 

Basically, the only alternative to the situation as you color it is to not have invaded and that, imho, is simply unacceptable.

I refuse to be held hostage to the fear and terror that some take delight in inflicting on America and I'm glad that we have a president with the balls to kick some ass when that is the only remaining course of action (no alternatives were left unexplored) except the contunuation of 12 years of toothless UN threats.

A good offense is still the best defense (against terror).

The attacks on Americans in Iraq are NOT being orchestrated by a popular uprising of everyday Iraqis who just want Americans out. Our good, good friends in Iran and from Al Queda are largely responsible. To me, it is a good sign that they are this desperate. They will ultimately be defeated.

I continue to believe that twenty years from now, history (American history, anyway) will retrospectively approve of the wars on Afghanistan and Iraq. I cannot imagine how anyone looking back on America's actions could substantiate the argument that the world is less safe as a result of what we have done.

Every generation of Americans has been willing to make the sacrifices necessary to keep the world and ourselves safe. It is troubling to me that we seem to be turning into a nation of weenies who have no stomach for either discipline or sacrifice.

Couldn't help but notice how the tagline kind of worked with your handle ;)

There are two critical points of information that, from my point of view, were reported once and then never reported again. Put this into your view of the situation:

-- Earlier, the UN decided that it did not want to be protected by US security because they felt it sent the wrong kind of message.

-- The imam bown up in Nas -- Naza -- that location where they massively car-bombed? Earlier, he had decided that he did not want to be protected by US security because he felt it sent the wrong kind of message.

The Imam's brother said at one point that it was the fault of the US. THAT fact was reported widely -- even though it clearly was NOT the fault of the US.

In fact, because the US felt that the UN was making a huge mistake, they rehearsed emergency extraction from that UN location... twice. As a result their quick response to the bombing was credited with saving many lives.

All you hear about on the news are the people who hate us. There's plenty of folks who are thrilled to have us there, and would choose us over Saddam any day. I've met quite a few of them.

As I see the picture...

--The US is in over its head, and could use--needs--the help from the UN--actually from the countries that won't go in without the UN seal of approval. If anything, in terms of cost control...how much dinero is this costing us right now?

--The UN is just itching to get in, in an attempt to make peace with the US...second thoughts, perhaps? *shrugs* Kofi was the one that suggested the American command thing.

--A lot of the anger at us seems to be coming from the Shi'a...and some (many maybe?) of them seem eager to set up a theocracy. Maybe they're pissed off b/c we didn't help them 12 years ago.

--Iraq desperately needs to be up and running on its own ASAP, for the sake of everyone involved.

CNN's Rym Brahimi regularly reports the worst facts she can find followed by one or two sentences of complete conjecture and editorializing. According to her, the US is at extreme fault in every single thing it's done.

But I can't help but notice that every time she does her standup report live from Baghdad, she isn't wearing a head scarf. Sometimes it's the little things that say so much.

Ah yes, and it's worth every goddamn penny. This is how you play offense. What was not foreseen, it would appear, is that once the US had taken out Saddam, every last stinking extremist in the area would rub his hands with glee at the possibility of taking their war to the Great Satan with just a 6 or 8 hour drive and no customs. They're flooding the zone with assholes, and additional soldiers just means additional targets. Now we'll see how the Poles like being targets, and hopefully soon the French will take their turn.

tw nailed it exactly... until he got to his conclusion. The addition of more troops does little to protect soft infrastructure targets. We can't assign a trooper to every person in Iraq.

The Democratic contenders are truly screwed. There is no reasonable way to end the conflict, but how can you run on that? The best we can hope for is the end of neo-conservatism and its stunning hubris. That will be up to Bush, is he willing to say he was completely mislead into a conflict unrelated to American security?

From Lew Rockwell

Let's start with the big error. They believed that their will alone was enough to make and remake a country (whether Iraq or Afghanistan) and the world. They saw people as pliable, all events as controllable, and all outcomes as the inevitable working out of a well-constructed plan. Being the top dogs of the world's only superpower, they never doubted their ability to dictate the terms and so they had no plan for what to do if things went wrong.

This forgets several essential components of the structure of reality. People's free will is often backed by the willingness to undertake enormous sacrifice. Such sacrifices are made every day by average Iraqis. Most especially it overlooks certain underlying laws that limit what is possible in human affairs. In the scheme of how the world works, even the largest state is only a bit player. It is capable of creating enormous chaos and transferring huge amounts of wealth, but not of controlling events themselves. Government action often generates results opposite of those the policy is constructed to create.

The Bush administration did not want to believe this. They had a very simple model in mind, namely that Iraq was a country lorded over by a single dictator, and so all that was necessary to take over the country was to displace (decapitate) the dictator and install a new form of government that would run the country according to the liking of the Bush administration. It further believed that all resistance could be crushed by a proper application of violence and the threat of violence.

The truth is that no society operates like this. Human beings don't respond well to being treated like prisoners in someone else's central plan. If the desire is to wholly manage the future, the mega-planner is always a mega-failure, if not always in the short term certainly always in the long term. The Bush administration had bigger dreams than Wilson or FDR. But as Maureen Dowd aptly puts it: "The group that started out presuming it could shape the world is now getting shoved by the world."

Lew misses the fundamental point that the "resistance" is largely NOT Iraqi. Even Saddam had to say "See - that wasn't me who offed the Imam."

Eh, you have some links for that claim, UT? I've heard that suspected, and I have heard of non-Iraqi militants getting in the country, but definite confirmation? Maybe I just missed it...

I would think that getting more international troops in as well as getting more Iraqis trained would allow US troops to deal with infrastructure issues.

Maybe to you...$79 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan in April, and at least $60 billion more is wanted now. A drop in the bucket of the national budget, but certainly not chump change. There are much better things that the money could be spent on, IMO.

Even before US occupation, the headscarf was not required in Iraq.

All you hear from right wing extremists are that people hate America. But once the hype and fear from Rush Limbaugh types is eliminated, we find a world in despair over how their good friend has gone 'mental midget'. Only an ill informed fool would see hate and enemies everywhere.

In the meantime, people throughout the world openly and correctly challenged what was clearly suspect claims of mythical weapons of mass destruction. This is proof they hate us? We now know no such weapons existed AND that the administration (both in US and UK) were openy lying about knowledge of those weapons - just like Nixon and VietNam.

One who is not paranoid does not hear how all these people hate us. However this president is encouraging Muslim fanatics to recruit terrorists to attack the US. That is something to fear. We have become our own worse enemy - just like in Somolia and VietNam.

In the meantime, eliminate the rhetoric from a right wing administration and listen to what reported in Iraq (by those who speak Arabic). These people who UT also cannot listen to. What those reporters were saying then is now why Geroge Jr is desperately seeking UN help - in direct contradiction to rherotic from right wing extremist Republicans.

Even George Jr suddenly realizes we have no exit strategy. Iraq is becoming the quagmire that military generals warned about. Only right wing extremists did not hear those reports and those warnings. Only right wing extremist contradict the military and say we have enough troops in Iraq. Only right wing extremist would have us forget what generals, now removed by Rumsfeld, were warning about. At least 200,000 troops for up to five years in Iraq. Leaves nothing to rebuild Afghanistan.

The US desperately needs international help because the long term situation in Iraq is not good and getting worse. Those are facts from so many sources who speak Arabic and have been there. Eliminate the administraton lies and the reports are a country that is now in anarchy almost everywhere. And a civilian administrator that has no representative outside of Baghdad - because the Paul Bremer program is in disarray.

Only those who make the world hate us would think the world hates Americans. They are called right wing extremists who think everyone in the UN is an adversary. They are also same people in denial of reports everywhere - from UN representative, US military, and the world press corp.

The US now has a quagmire. We cannot withdraw. We have no exit strategy. Every day the status quo continues (fundamental lack of leadership from both Washington and Bremer), the situation will get worse. Even George Jr has conceded that the money pit called Iraq is a no wing situation - and is desperately putting out olive branches to UN nations - and requesting help.

Todays NY Times has an article on how the 101st is working successuflly. In most cases, insufficient or no support from the Bremer people or from Washington. It demonstrates how this administration is making "ugly Americans" throughout other parts of Iraq - just as in the book "Ugly American".

Actually, I think it would be pretty fucking funny if we just upped and left. I've been thinking about that one a lot lately.

"Well, they wanted us to go, so off we went..."

And just left it as is. I mean, we'd save a ton of cash. And the Shi'a could set up a religious theocracy and become like Saudi Arabia and Iran.

But then, the Kurds and Sunnis would probably get the beat down. Then they'd ask for help...then the cycle would start all over again...

You would then get strong opposition from one who was against this whole boondoogle from the very beginning - me. I opposed it, in part, because there was no turning back. We are now stuck there because this administration had no exit strategy and repeatedly ignored warnings from those who knew better. This administration had their rhetoric and that was all they needed to hear. Only those who agreed with the rhetoric were heard. UN opposition was because we were wrong to invade Iraq and now must pay the price. We cannot leave.

I even heard a comment from an administration that sounded just like the famous expresson - "light at the end of the tunnel".

Today, a Civil Engineering organization reports that infrastructure programs have all but come to a standstill. We should start seeing the associated problems starting in about four years. Too much money on defense of missile that don't exist using technology that does not work. Too much money trying to police the world. We have returned to problems that were characteristic of Vietnam. Plenty of money for the military - debt everywhere else. That is why a president is suppose to see more than just fear and enemies everywhere.

We got the president that right wing extremists love - beause they too see hate and fear everywhere. Now we are stuck.

I dunno, but here's where the CIA says the tape is Saddam saying it wasn't him hitting Mohammed Baqer al-Hakim, and they've also worked out that this hit and the UN hit were both done with the same types of munitions. And that the UN hit directly targetted Sergio Vieira de Mello, which if it is the case, may or may not be payback for his role in East Timor, which increases the probability that al Queda is involved.

It probably is that the "real"/"best" reason to go to Iraq was because the US looked at the chessboard* of the middle east and said, boy, it looks like we could be facing a perfect storm of the combination of islamic militantism and nuclear proliferation, and the quickest way to solve that problem is to create a US-friendly government smack dab in the middle of it.

(Credit them, I guess, for not just doing it the easy/old way and assassinating Hussein and installing their own puppet.)

And it could be that the money guys in the rest of the region realized that TOO, that a US-friendly Iraq meant their own golden goose was gonna cook soon, and saw the only way for them to maintain the Saudi status quo would be to try to get the US operation to fail.

And so the strategic bombing of the pipeline, and the waterline, and the mosque, all in an attempt to enflame the people and slow down the improvements and make the US lose its nerve. And perhaps the UN too, to make the UN lose its nerve.

Now IF all that is the case, the very worst thing to do under any circumstances would be to punt. In fact, that would be so strategically insane -- to create a continuing FAILED state in the middle of the middle east would be catastrophic.

Now France and Germany have again voted to say that they prefer the status quo. They like the current assholes in charge in Saudi Arabia. They prefer if Iraq becomes a failed state. Or at least they seem to, with their first chess move today. Notice that no number of Iraqis in pain outweighs the politics of the UN or Chiraq's hope that he can get a better deal out of stalling and negotiating.

*credit Bill Maher for this analogy

We don't need more guards. We have the wrong people there. Last group we should have in country are two heavy armour divisions. They are not trained. They don't have the right equipment. But right wing rhetoric says they have what they need - they just don't know it yet.

How bad was the administration's plan to end this war? What plan? Why could Saddam restore electricity and other civil services in a month? We can't even restore electricity four months later - and now make silly excuses. What does armour know about infrastructure? Nothing. This administration had no exit strategy nor even a plan how to restore the country. Classic MBA management technique.

But it gets worse. From Washington comes a silly mandate that all Baath party members are to be banned from working. Even Patton confronted that silliness when he was told not to use Nazis. You wanted a job? Then you had sign silly papers and be a Nazi or Baath party member. Do we want the country back in order? Yes. Then Baath party members need be hired. But not according to George Jr and his man Bremer. They are evil. They signed those papers!

Again the NY Times article on how the 101st is getting problems solved. They let Baath party members start teaching again - because all teachers had to be Baath party members regardless of their political mindset.

Same stupidity about disbanning the Iraqi army. No civil authority because those who could have helped restore order were banned. Political rhetoric instead of the intelligence of pragmatism - classic right wing thinking. We created the anarchy by creating a power vacuum. No plans to set up a civilian government. No one to maintain order. No one who knew how to even restore electricity. Then suddenly emergeny contracts with unlimited money to Halliburton et al to come fix the poblems. Then a shortage of US troops AND without proper equipment or translators. What a mess directly traceable to the MBA in the White House.

We don't need more guards. We needed more of everything else including intelligent leaders AND no more rhetoric from Washington.

The NY Times article is quite revealing about why the rest of Iraq is going chaotic. UT need not read it since it will dispute his preconceived notions - just another article from an anti-American newspaper:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/04/in...al/04NORT.html

Don't forget what George Jr told us. This Iraq war would be paid for by Iraqi oil. So where is that $1billion in oil revenue. And where is the other $499 billion per year coming from? George Jr caught in another lie. The right wing will again forgive him for lying. That is the Christian way.

And the last thing I want is you being against me.

I don't think we should pull out at all...then we'd be even bigger assholes than we already are. We made the mess, we have to clean it up--be it on our own, with UN help, whatever.

Said better and with less words. We made it. Mom says we have to clean it up.

Which is sighted more often - al Queda or Elvis?

When do we finally concede that al Queda is not hiding under every bed? Oh. Right wing extremist see enemies everywhere?

I saw that article, UT. And while I don't doubt that it could be Uncle Saddam on that tape, we don't know whether his folks are even listening to him anymore...they could very well be acting on their own.

Very interesting connection that I hadn't thought about. If we look at it from that viewpoint though, it could also be Filipino militants pissed off at us for putting Marcos up for his final days.

After seeing France's reaction to the Lockerbie settlement, I am convinced that the French merely want a piece of the pie. Not necessarily bad...who doesn't like making money? But if they really are of that viewpoint, just fucking admit it already.

This settles it...I'm going to the library this weekend to read some books about French culture and politics. I just don't get them sometimes, and maybe it's just because I am ignorant of who they really are.

She's your Mom not mine. Sorry, I'm not taking responsibility for what statists do. We've run this excuse out time and time again for interventionist policies. I've backed it in the past but no more. I'm not participating in any more collective guilt games.

This editorial from yesterday explains how one of bin Ladin's closest associates sees secular democracy in Iraq as the major threat to the Islamic world.

Wise up.

Now this president has no idea why he gets such a cool reception from other world nations. Money to an MBA is something you throw everywhere to solve problems:
Classic MBA. Money means nothing to him especially when it is someone elses money. No wonder he ran a surplus into the biggest debt this nation has ever seen in but his first two years. And then he does not understand why other nations so distrust him? They love America. They don't trust George Jr. Just another in the long list of reasons why.

Ah-hahahaha! What a funny man!

You know better than that Griff...unless you move to Canada or one of the US territories, you're fucked just like the rest of us.

*sigh*

Allow me my little fantasies, won't yah?

I understand Griff...I'm pondering a move to PR myself.

France wants deals for its own weasels, they dont want to pay Halliburton. What a mess.

Q: What about Arabs coming in from other countries?

A: Well, it seems to me -- and the weight of evidence indicates -- that Arab Islamists have fully joined the Iraqi resistance in Iraq ... Iraqi is gradually but steadily replacing Afghanistan and Bosnia as a magnet for many Jihadi recruits to confront the forces of the so-called "unbelief". And it seems to me that anti-American forces must now feel that US forces are very vulnerable in Iraq and could be bogged down in a prolonged guerilla war. If this particular resistance continues I feel you're going to have many more Jihadi fighters joining the Jihad in Iraq against the American forces.

(9/2 NPR Interview with Fawaz Gerges, a Middle East and international affairs professor at Sarah Lawrence College. Gerges' bias is that this is a bad thing. YMMV. via defective yeti)

In the meantime, who still thinks America can force democracy on Iraq? Some foolishly thought we would just kick Saddam out and install a democratic government. They were not listening to the generals who were predicting 200,000 troops for up to 5 years. Presently the US is seeking an exit strategy because none existed when we started this fiasco - a top management failure. And now Iraq is becoming a quagmire. How many more died today trying to force a democracy where the people don't want it.

There ought to be a way to use this "magnet" effect... draw 'em in and then shoot 'em or something.

I noticed in Afghanistan, then again in Iraq, We didn't seem to do anything to secure the borders. In Afghanistan the got out and Iraq they're getting in.
With all the spy crap we have, we should at least know what's moving, even at night.
Maybe it's a trick to draw all the radicals in and nuke 'em?

Rumsfeld: "Are you an assassin?
Powell: "I’m a soldier."
Rumsfeld: "You’re neither. You’re an errand boy sent by the Joint Chiefs to collect the bill."
Rumsfeld: "They said my methods are insane. Do you think my methods are insane?"
Powell: "Frankly sir, I don't see any method..."

Today? None. No US military deaths today.

Oh, you posted that on the 6th. No deaths that day either.

There was a day in between - yesterday. No deaths.

There have been none, in fact, since September 1.

Hmm. I noticed the slowdown in news about it, hadn't realized it was an actual slowdown in deaths. Hopefully this means the local resistance (I won't call them terrorists if they're shooting at occupiers; sorry) and its allies are running out of steam. Rather than just saving up for something big.

I don't understand why the media made such a big deal out of finding 1 RPG launcher. I'll bet there's hundreds, maybe more, of those things floating around.

Yes, yes...we know you have one at your place, Bruce.

I noticed that Al Jazeera speculated a reason for the attack on the Iraq that is very similar to what Undertoad mentioned on the previous page. Al Jazeera delivered the idea differently: they proposed that the Bush Administration may have feared an alliance between Iran, Iraq, and Syria.

Unfortunately, the People in Charge should have thought of the chessboard analogy that Undertoad cited. Taking the center is very good strategy, but for a hundred years Chess players have known that attacking the center can be just as good.

(By the way, the Al Jazeera article illustrated some of the best reasons for attacking Iraq that I've heard of thus far. Potentially withdrawing from Saudi Arabia is a new idea to me, and it sounds appealing.)

NO, NO, NO. Don't be starting that kind of shit. Dave's company monitors these posts (among other things) for clues like that. The black helicopters are circling already.:eek:

You lost me on that "can be just as good" part. Tor.

I read we were building up other bases, in anticipation of pulling out of Saudi Arabia, before the war. I think we are worried about the royal family losing control and being caught off guard like we were in Iran.
Or we feel our presence is destabilizing the royal family.