[tw]

UK intelligence leaks confirm what American intelligence leaks also reported (no matter how the mental midget spins it). From the BBC of 28 Sept 2006:

Leak highlights a complex relationship
Many of the statements contained in the officer's notes, for example that the war in Iraq has not gone well and has served as a "recruiting sergeant" for extremists, are in line with other recently published assessments.

However, in some areas the Defence Academy's paper is quite opposed to Downing Street's world view, suggesting that "the UK has followed US policies on the global war on terror at the perceived exclusion of its own interests".

The officer suggests the Pentagon lacks a strategic big idea and that "the US/UK cannot begin to turn the tide until they identify the real enemies... and seek to put in place a better and more just vision".

... the writer does not suggest what that larger vision of prosecuting these conflicts might be.

Instead, he argues that British forces in Iraq "are effectively being held hostage... we are now fighting (and arguably losing or potentially losing) on two fronts".

Of course, this was so obvious even to Cellar Dwellers in May 2004:

The heads may roll.
We had a window of oppurtunity, typically three or six months, to prove we could improve their plight. Instead we have only replaced a tryrant with streets so unsafe that Iraqis can only hope things will get better. Wwe could not even get the electricity fully restored. Had we installed intelligent leaders in Iraq (ie Gen Garner), then Iraqis would have been building their own country. But instead we even violated principles clearly spelled out in "The Art of War" - a 500 BC book. The principles were that well proven which tells you something about the government that is running this war. We fired anyone who could make the utilities even work. Dear god. Did anyone even bother to learn the lessons of post war Germany? No. The president's knowledge of the world was a one year crash course headed by Conduleeza Rice. He is that mentally ignorant of this world.

And later that May 2004 in Exit Strategy

Originally Posted by tw

We had 6 month to get it right. Instead we sent in people so mentally deficient as to even disband the Iraqi Army and Police. And yes I do mean so mentally deficient as to not even learn how a WWII American army avoided same problems in Germany. We fired anyone (out of stupidity and political rhetoric reasons) who could have made the electricity and other utilities work. Why? Only because to have such jobs, they had to be Baath party members. Therefore they were not good enough to make the country work again.

Originally Posted by kitsume

What? Let me get this straight: You expected the US to deploy an army overseas, overthrow a dictator, rebuild the infrastructure we blew to pieces, and restore civillian happiness in a mere six months?

That is exactly what had to happen and that is exactly why planning for the peace must be ongoing before hostilities begin. That was also what a State Department analysis group noted when they also warned of looting. Remember the looting that Rumsfeld and George Jr denied? In thirty some years when another president lies to America, I hope you youngsters remember these 'Deja Vue Vietnam' lessons.

We broke it. Now we own it. But a mental midget president had no idea what Colin Powell was warning. We and Powell did not realize how dumb this president really is.

So how long ago did we know things were getting that bad? Well it depends on whether you were listening to propaganda (especially Fox News) or were listening to facts (with contempt for any logic justified by political rhetoric). Posted even in Oct 2003 were Iraqi conditions (that only get worse) created because "Americans don't do nation building". Undeniable even to the Cellar's most politically extreme because they cannot deny leaked American and British intelligence reports:

Liberating them against their will.
Bottom line is that Iraqis more want what they once had under Saddam. Security, jobs, and basic services are more important to Iraqis than freedom of speech and no Saddam in their text books. And what did we not provide? Electricty for up to 6 months. Jobs for unemployed army troops - who could have been providing the security and restoring basic services. And security. As far as Iraqis are concerned, each bombing is just another reason to blame Americans.

Tonight on PBS Newshour, what does every Iraqi say they want? Number one want in Iraq is "Security". What did America not provide for half a year in Iraq? Security. Too few troops. No plans. Then we made it even worse by disbanning all soldiers and police. Now Iraqis are suffering from something that they never knew - *kidnappings*. One family has lost both kids for a second time in three months! Kidnapping never happened in Iraq until the Americans liberated crime! It does not matter what Dave thinks. This is want Iraqis see. They don't like what America has forced on them.

Even three years ago in The Cellar was posted the problems in Iraq - if reading factually and not with extremist political bias. We had six months to accomplish what we did not even start until the seventh month. Yes, kitsume, that much must be done that quickly or military victory is lost. Instead, we did nothing as our right wing extremists said we should. We did zero and then made it worse by disbanding the military and police. Only an extremist ignorant wacko would have done that.

Let's see. The United States and UK invaded and conquered all of western Europe in half this "Mission Accomplished" war. We then got European utilities working again in only months. Big difference - then compared to now. Back then our leaders had basic intelligence, did not have an extremist political agenda, learned lessons from history, and did not lie repeatedly.

When do we talk about impeachment?