Iraq undone: Wolfowitz: Perhaps mistakes were made

The BBQ Pit
1

My dear friend Wolfowitz has finallyt conceded that his analyses of Iraq in the post-fall of Sadaam were not accurate (an understatement)… I await december to update his talking points with full disregard of past positions or fact, in good old Soviet Style.

See:
Wolfowitz Concedes Iraq Errors
By Peter Slevin and Dana Priest
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, July 24, 2003; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37468-2003Jul23.html

Meanwhile my schaden freud noting as well that the Administration’s gambit of blaming the CIA has proven to be… how shall we say it, “factually challenged” - for wont of not wishing to use the phrase “outright lying to cover their butts.”

See
Bush Aides Disclose Warnings From CIA
Oct. Memos Raised Doubts on Iraq Bid
by Dana Milbank and Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, July 23, 2003; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31597-2003Jul22.html

2

I believe bush sr. is not happy - still has a lot of friends at langley, doesn’t like them taking the fall.

3

For the purposes of comparison:

One of the problems the Brits (in Iraq) have been able to limit (this time around) is the problem of being subject to the US chain of command. It’s, lets say, ‘unconventional’ having politicians involved in the *implementation *of policy… Conventionally, politicians make the big policy decisions and the military decide how to achieve the goals, cos, you know, that’s what they do. That way, you don’t get stuff like this:

“Career civil servants who had helped plan U.S. peacekeeping operations in Haiti, Bosnia and Kosovo said it was imperative to maintain a military force large enough to stamp out challenges to its authority right away. Gen. Eric K. Shinseki, then-Army chief of staff, thought several hundred thousand soldiers would be needed.

Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz rebutted him sharply and publicly.

"It’s hard to conceive that it would take more forces to provide stability in post-Saddam Iraq than it would take to conduct the war itself and to secure the surrender of Saddam’s security forces and his army," Wolfowitz told the House Budget Committee on Feb. 27. "Hard to imagine."

  • why was that hard to imagine ? Why is it any of your business ? Presumably, he “imagined” the ‘post-war ‘guerrillas’ would stand around in uniform with 2nd/3rd generation weapons long enough for an air strike to be called. . . based on his decades of experience, no doubt . . .

On the other issue, so far in the UK, there has not been a notable public crack in the relationship between government and the Intel community. MI6, etc. have seemingly made a policy decision (or a deal with (Blair’s Bitch) Campbell) to keep a stony silence.

But no one, no one, is happy about the politicisation of Intelligence.

It has legs, we’re a long way yet from establishing the who, what, where’s of, for example, the “45 minutes” claim.

4
5

Wolfowitz’s comment shows the bankruptcy of the position. No plan survives contact, all the better to have well concieved contingency plans, above all given the fact that regional experts such as myself were warning their conception of Iraq was fantastical.

6

Someone made mistakes!? :eek:

[Marisa Tomei voice]

What if we make one, too? Oh, my God. What a fucking nightmare!

[/Marisa Tomei voice]

7

That’s some pretty darned important stuff to be fucking up, don’t you think, Lib? And of course, that’s not even counting the outright lies, which simply cannot be counted as “mistakes” at all.

8

Indeed, minty, indeed.

If I may share two more articles (as well as direct attention to the issue of reconstruction which no one seems to want to grapple with)

First,
Why Commander in Chief Is Losing the War of the 16 Words
A nice round up by the WP on how the Admin story in re its NBC and specifically Nuclear claims has fallen apart. (As well as highlighting the risks of fucking with the Agency when they were in fact in the right)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37481-2003Jul23.html?nav=hptop_ts

Second a somewhat more analytical article from FT (again hands down in my opinion as having the best record to date tracking Reconstruction)
Pentagon ‘was not ready for postwar Iraq’
http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1058868093266&p=1012571727102

to paraphrase the words of one Admin source, they had planned for a ‘Liberation’ but they got an occupation.

Badly, badly misreading things.

9

Now you’re mentioning what you’re not counting, eh? Still… Mistakes and lies from politicians… I defer again to Marisa.

10

And as I leave for the weekend I am sad to add that I have just learned a friend of mine got whacked on the Hillel - Baghdad route. Hope to help out in the medevac.

Mistakes were made.

11

Oh, the liberal Washington Post eh? Here I’ll save the idealogues the trouble and handwave it for them. Call back when it is on Fox news and maybe we’ll talk.

Enjoy,
Steven

12

“mistakes”? I"m reminded of what I say to my clients (Convicted felons for those of you who don’t know) when they say “I made a mistake”.

my reply?

“Oh, you thought that was your Lexus?”

13

“Mistakes were made” is bad enough. The lack of any discussion of lessons learned is inexcusable.

Coll, sorry to hear of your friend’s situation. Let us know.

14

Best of luck, Coll.

  • Tamerlane
15

One of my single greatest concerns about this fucked up administration’s inablilty to shoot straight is how they have completely squandered all of their moral capital on Iraq. Critical credibility has been lost just as a much more dangerous threat looms on the horizon in the form of North Korea.

I can only wonder whether Shrub will ever be held accountable if the United States is hit with nuclear terror using fissile material from North Korea.

Coll, my sympathies to your friend. I hope they will be all right.

16

Zenster

Should Cigar be held accountable if the United States is hit with a Chinese missile?

17

Hope your pal is okay, Collounsbury.

Just for the record, Fox is in fact reporting the situation a little differently:

“Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz said Wednesday that morale of U.S. troops in Iraq remains high and Iraqis have expressed ‘enormous gratitude’ for coalition efforts to topple Saddam’s regime.”

And, thanks to my double-secret sources high within the government, I’m permitted to forward one of the thank-you letters from an Iraqi citizen:

18

I don’t fucking believe it.

I don’t fucking believe it!

I don’t fucking believe it!

This fucking shit is seriously fucked up.

I suppose, in a way, I should be grateful for Cheesemiesters link to that article. I already knew the “postwar planning” was demonstrably weak, but had no idea…not so much as a glimmering…of the sheer bloody-mindedness…the adamant stupidity…

I remember hearing about that cute little stunt with airlifting Chalabi into the area with 700 bodyguards. Guys gotta be awfully popular and widely loved to need 700 bodyguards. And I remember thinking, “Geez, these guys can’t be thinking that they storm in, pop Saddam out of the socket, stick Chalabi in, and presto! Instant country!”

And then I thought “Naaaah. Nobody’s that freaking stupid!”

That said, I don’t like the culture of it, I don’t like the military having a voice at the table when foreign policy is being made. There is a very good reason why the Constitution is so explicit about civilian control. They had absolutely no business being held co-equal to the State Dept et. al in making post war plans. And more than co-equal, they were apparently in a position to overrule! This is not good! Nosir!

I dont mean this to dishonor the military. But they are trained for what they do best. Spreadsheets and position papers, the dark mysteries of compound interest, these are not for them, and they have no business butting their opinions.

The military must not get used to making policy! Ideas don’t come any worse than that.

Cite? Any volume of history, taken at random. From Sargon through Thucydides right down to Barbara Tuchman, its number one in the series Really Really Bad Ideas of Western Man. Number one with a bullet.

19

I hope your friend is alright, Collounsbury.

This from the FT article is just stupefying:

Planners were expecting parts of the Iraqi army to aid the coalition in providing post war security? The self delusion is mind numbing. To hope for it, possibly, but to plan for it? Wow. Unbelievable, completely unbelievable.

20

Well, hey, them A-rabs, they appreciate a show of force, you know? So after we go in and Shock-and-Awe the bejeebers out of them, and pop Saddam like a bad zit, the surviving members of the Iraqi army willbe so impressed with our Superior Firepower that they’ll gladly sign up and help keep order! After all, we gotta keep the American troops where they’ll do the most good – guarding the oil wells.

:rolleyes: