Prince Bandar told dumb George to buy Saddam’s government out from under him, lock, stock and two blazing barrels.
This from our 'closest ally" and the next door neighbor of our enemy.
This from a guy who knows the ground, and is fundamentally (on this point anyway) one hundred percent on our side.
the cost:$200 million for three months wages.
Instead, they made a blunder that will reverberate throughout the history of the american republic as one of the stupidest and costliest ever made by a president.
Are there any good arguments for not taking Bandar’s advice, and, more importantly, are there any good arguments for repecting the judgement of the guy who turned the advice down?
I seem to recall similar arguments about Vietnam, perhaps why it wasn’t done there is the same reason it couldn’t have been done in Iraq.
I hope there was a good reason, and it wasn’t just blood-lust. I dislike Bush and his administration, but I’m not quite at the point where I believe they are so bloodthirsty to spend far more money for a far more bloody scenario.
Please, someone find a good reason why buying the army wouldn’t work.
Because you can’t “win hearts and minds” while at the same time enforcing order
by employing the same thugs who have beat up those hearts and minds for the past few decades.
Because three months pay to a soldier does not guarantee neverending loyalty. Many of the soldiers that we hired to form the new Iraqi military either deserted or switched sides - if we hired the old regime’s soldiers they might well have done the same.
Because it’s far from clear that the majority of the insurgents are former soldiers in the Iraqi Army.
Because corrupt officials or generals might have found some way to stiff the troops and run off with the money.
Because Bandar is a supporter of Al Queda and was most likely just looking for a way to install a Shi’ite government in Iraq.
Not to mention a trial balloon was floated over the weekend about giving amnesty to Ba’ath party members in the Army and Police if they’d come back to work.
Importing American thugs doesn’t seem to be working that well either.
No but leaving him without a job guarantees he will be an enemy.
This is very true but the USA has done everything wrong so that some who could be on their side have been made enemies. It is the price of the arrogance.
Ha! like it’s not happening right now. The waste and corruption are staggering.
So if he is a supporter of AlQaeda why is the US fighting others who aren’t and yet does nothing to him?
Well, Saddam Hussein just didn’t lavish money on both political parties as well as countless American think tanks, charities, and other organizations. Bandar did. It seems that the real goal that the Saudi royal family has for him was to basically buy some goodwill for themselves; they certainly are capable of meeting the price.
1.) I saw the interview on Meet the Press this weekend and I just knew once I got back in town and checked the SDMB this thread would be here.
2.) I also just knew there’d not be a single person “upset” over the flights out of the U.S. for OBL’s family when Bandar specifically identified Richard Clark as being whom he had meetings with to remove them. Once he said Richard Clark’s name, I knew it’d drop into obscurity - can’t blame Bush any longer and can’t take attacks at the poster boy for the far left anti-Bush crowd.
MJ:I also just knew there’d not be a single person “upset” over the flights out of the U.S. for OBL’s family when Bandar specifically identified Richard Clark as being whom he had meetings with to remove them.
Who says nobody’s upset over those flights? I’ve been upset about them since Sept. 14 2001 or whenever it was we found out about them. I don’t see why you think that nobody on the left would dare to disapprove of any action just because Richard Clarke did it, but you’re certainly wrong. Just because nobody happens to have mentioned it in a thread about a different topic doesn’t mean we’re trying to hush it up, you know.
ITRc:It seems that the real goal that the Saudi royal family has for him was to basically buy some goodwill for themselves; they certainly are capable of meeting the price.
Well, that would be in line with Neil Bush’s advice in his January 2002 speech in Saudi Arabia:
This speech has struck me as odd ever since I first heard about it: you mean it’s not really about democracy, terrorism, justice, and freedom so much as good old PR? Package your media message more effectively and the US will tilt your way? Wow.
Fair enough, especially considering a thread that is about a different subject.
<Sarcasim On>
Now, let’s see… where did that thread go about Richard Clarke approving OBL’s family and numerous other Saudi’s leaving the country go. I know it must be around here somewhere. picks up a rock Nope, that is The Pit and nothing there. turns over a leaf Nope, nothing in GD either. Hmmm… darn thread is always sneaking away when you are not looking I guess.
<Sarcasim Off>
You should probably note that we didn’t really do much fighting against regulars in Iraq. Most of them deserted - they had no loyalty to the regime and couldn’t stand up to us anyway.
It stands as a tribute to the blindness of the left that they immediately believe this fool.
The problem that Prince Bandar’s suggestion solves is not the same problem that the Bush Administration was trying to fix. Bandar wants to get rid of Hussein (ending the pissing contest between the US and Iraq and allowing US/UK forces to go home victorious) with the minimum disruption to Saudi Arabia and its interests. A new (Sunni) dictator allows everyone to go about their business same as it was before 1991. The Bush Administration made Iraq the focus of the Omnibus Good-for-what-ails-ye Middle Eastern Reconstruction and Revitalization Program.
Part of the reason we didn’t do much fighting was we did pay off a number of generals, making them even less enthusiastic about fighting, enforcing discipline. The key advantage of paying them off was it guaranteed that bridges wouldn’t be blown up.
Which fool? Bush or Prince Bandar? Or is there a third antecendent possible?
So let me get this straight. Bandar was practically weaned by Barbara Bush, and yet it’s the left that should be criticized for their relationship to him? Did the Bush family get inducted as members of the left in a secret ceremony that I don’t know about, or do you have some other evidence to back up your statement with?
