Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 74

Thread: 10 Years On, Paul Wolfowitz Admits U.S. Bungled in Iraq

  1. #1
    Sage
    pbrauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-27-15 @ 03:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,394

    10 Years On, Paul Wolfowitz Admits U.S. Bungled in Iraq

    Gee Paul, tell us something we didn't know already.

    The former deputy Pentagon chief, Paul Wolfowitz, a driving force behind the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, has conceded that a series of blunders by George W. Bush’s administration plunged Iraq into a cycle of violence that “spiralled out of control”.

    In an interview with The Sunday Times to mark the 10th anniversary of the Iraq invasion, he said there “should have been Iraqi leadership from the beginning”, rather than a 14-month occupation led by an American viceroy and based on “this idea that we’re going to come in like [General Douglas] MacArthur in Japan and write the constitution for them”.

    He accepted that too many Iraqis were excluded by a programme to purge members of the ruling Ba’ath party, that the dissolution of the Iraqi army was botched and that the “biggest hole” in post-war planning was not to anticipate the possibility of an insurgency.

    “The most consequential failure was to understand the tenacity of Saddam’s regime,” he said.

    Wolfowitz, 69, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington since he stepped down as World Bank president in 2007, has a somewhat diffident manner but he became animated as he reflected on the lead-up to the invasion and its aftermath.



    Read more: 10 Years On, Paul Wolfowitz Admits U.S. Bungled in Iraq | RealClearPolitics
    Follow us: @RCP_Articles on Twitterm

  2. #2
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,561

    Re: 10 Years On, Paul Wolfowitz Admits U.S. Bungled in Iraq

    Wolfowitz is right this time. Having invaded Iraq in the first place was a wrong decision with huge consequences.

    Interesting observation here, from the link in the OP:

    Wolfowitz called for Saddam’s overthrow during the 1991 Gulf War and was the first senior official to advise Bush, days after the September 11, 2001, terror attacks, to seek regime change in Iraq.
    The connection between the attack of 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq was... what again? Oh, right. The former gave the war hawks an excuse for the latter, even though Iraq had nothing at all to do with the terrorist attack on that dark day.

    George Bush I was right to have sent Saddam's forces packing and then go home. Cheney, Wolfowitz, and Rumsfeld were wrong to keep agitating for an invasion. Now, Wolfowitz has admitted that the invasion was a mistake. Cheney? Rumsfeld? What have you to say?
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

  3. #3
    Guru
    ChuckBerry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Lafayette, Louisiana
    Last Seen
    10-28-13 @ 01:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,491

    10 Years On, Paul Wolfowitz Admits U.S. Bungled in Iraq

    At no point in the article does Wolfowitz say that invasion was the wrong choice.
    The morality of abortion is not a religious belief, any more than the morality of slavery, apartheid, rape, larceny, murder or arson is a religious belief. These are norms of the natural law of mankind and can be legislated even in a completely religionless society.

  4. #4
    Sage
    Ontologuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,516

    Re: 10 Years On, Paul Wolfowitz Admits U.S. Bungled in Iraq

    It's one thing to bungle Iraq tactically, it's quite another thing to bungle America's reputation philosophically .. about which the majority of Americans agree: Most Americans think Iraq War was a mistake: Poll | The Ticket - Yahoo! News.

    What I and a few others outside the loop realized from the onset is that we invaded Iraq for the oil, and for no other reason .. or so we thought.

    As it was later revealed, Saddam was working out a deal with China and Russia, brokered by the French, to send oil to China, Russia would get cheap Chinese goods, and Iraq would get Russian weapons, and the French, for making it all happen, they'd get oil too, and the beltway-coined "freedom fries" was our way of digging at the French for that while still keeping things under wrap.

    Saddam, however, was all tapped out of available light sweet crude for China .. but, the Gulf War sanctions against him adding .. and subtracting .. trading partners was about to expire! .. And then we invaded.

    So China never got that oil .. and we still have our special light sweet Iraqi crude, which at the time accounted for nearly 20% of the foreign crude refined in California alone.

    Were there ever terrorists in Iraq? Just Saddam. He wouldn't abide the Al Qaeda competition.

    Were there WMDs in Iraq? No. And we all know that WMD really means: nukes. There were no nukes in Iraq. That was proven. None being built, no nuke materials being imported from South Africa, nada. There weren't even any bio-weapons. And chemical agents, like mustard gas? We knew about that many years ago. Not an excuse.

    Were Iraqis clamoring for "democracy"? That's a laugh!

    Did we invade simply to get jobs for Halliburton and the lot? Yeah .. no.

    Did we invade to get "revenge" for Daddy Bush? Again .. don't make me laugh, liberals.

    We all know now what only The White house and the Senat Security Commission knew back then: that we invaded to keep our share of that special short-supply light sweet Iraqi crude from being diverted to China and creating a western economic depression as a result.

    Now, some who said that was the only reason we invaded have backed off a bit from that. This after realizing that those nukes the soviets kept on rails, moving them around and stuff .. well, a couple in the Ukraine went unaccounted for, and the thought was they were eventually to be headed for Iraq in the deal .. though I find it unfathomable that Russia would ever "let" that happen.

    Maybe it was better to keep a lid on the more underlying reason we intervened, the real reason Bush was so actively looking around for what appeared to be an excuse to attack Iraq.

    After all, bringing it all out in the open and indicting Russia, that might have lead to planetary suicide. Whupping Iraq as an unspoken message not to do stupid things like "let" nukes make their way to the likes of Saddam Hussein.

    All I know is, I don't ever want to be President, have to carry around that little black box, and be responsible for keeping really good secrets .. about which I simply don't want to know.

    Nope .. don't want to know.
    You don't trust Trump? Well, there's only one way to leverage him to do what's economically right for us all: Powerful American Political Alliance. Got courage?! .. and a mere $5.00?

  5. #5
    Sage
    pbrauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-27-15 @ 03:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,394

    Re: 10 Years On, Paul Wolfowitz Admits U.S. Bungled in Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by ChuckBerry View Post
    At no point in the article does Wolfowitz say that invasion was the wrong choice.
    That's probably one of the last things he would say, he was one of the neocons that urged President Clinton to invade.

    Letter to President Clinton on Iraq

  6. #6
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,561

    Re: 10 Years On, Paul Wolfowitz Admits U.S. Bungled in Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by ChuckBerry View Post
    At no point in the article does Wolfowitz say that invasion was the wrong choice.
    Not in so many words, no. He does talk about "Iraqi leadership." It's hard to see how that could happen when foreign forces invade and take over by force.
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

  7. #7
    Mod Conspiracy Theorist
    rocket88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    A very blue state
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,174

    Re: 10 Years On, Paul Wolfowitz Admits U.S. Bungled in Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by pbrauer View Post
    Gee Paul, tell us something we didn't know already.

    The former deputy Pentagon chief, Paul Wolfowitz, a driving force behind the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, has conceded that a series of blunders by George W. Bush’s administration plunged Iraq into a cycle of violence that “spiralled out of control”.

    In an interview with The Sunday Times to mark the 10th anniversary of the Iraq invasion, he said there “should have been Iraqi leadership from the beginning”, rather than a 14-month occupation led by an American viceroy and based on “this idea that we’re going to come in like [General Douglas] MacArthur in Japan and write the constitution for them”.

    He accepted that too many Iraqis were excluded by a programme to purge members of the ruling Ba’ath party, that the dissolution of the Iraqi army was botched and that the “biggest hole” in post-war planning was not to anticipate the possibility of an insurgency.

    “The most consequential failure was to understand the tenacity of Saddam’s regime,” he said.

    Wolfowitz, 69, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington since he stepped down as World Bank president in 2007, has a somewhat diffident manner but he became animated as he reflected on the lead-up to the invasion and its aftermath.



    Read more: 10 Years On, Paul Wolfowitz Admits U.S. Bungled in Iraq | RealClearPolitics
    Follow us: @RCP_Articles on Twitterm

    It seems fairly obvious that the whole thing was bungled. Even if invasion in and of itself wasn't a bad idea, the planning that went into it was atrocious. Best one line analysis of Iraq that I heard (and I wish I could remember who said it) "We went in with an overly rosy plan A, and no plan B."


    Quote Originally Posted by Jetboogieman View Post
    This issue has been plowed more times than Paris Hilton.
    Quote Originally Posted by Oborosen View Post
    Too bad we have to observe human rights.

  8. #8
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,193

    Re: 10 Years On, Paul Wolfowitz Admits U.S. Bungled in Iraq

    The major problem with the conduct of the war in Iraq was the actions of Paul Bremer after the fall of Saddam. Bush and Cheney were right, the people of Iraq welcomed the US soldiers with open arms and cheered them as liberators. However, Bremer allowed the Iraqi military to be dispanded, allowed them to take their weapons with them, and sent them off with no jobs and no opportunities. Inner City Chicago can tell you what happens with a highly armed young population with no hopes.

    What followed was a ransacking of all Iraqi government historical sites and treasures as well as gangs with guns roaming the streets killing, raping and pillaging the country. It's pretty hard to set up a transitional government that was more feared and dangerous than Saddam's but Bremer found a way.

    In those early days, the war for "hearts and minds" was largely lost and resulted in a decade of additional US life and treasure being lost in Iraq.

  9. #9
    Tavern Bartender
    Pussy Grabbin' Beaver
    Middleground's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Canada's Capital
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    22,458
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: 10 Years On, Paul Wolfowitz Admits U.S. Bungled in Iraq

    Iraq was a huge mistake. Besides the countless lives lost and the lives that are now destroyed by war, nothing has changed. Unless you want to count the death of a has-been dictator who at least kept his people in check. It was like the Bush Administration took a 2 trillion dollar dump and flushed it down a ginormous toilet.
    “No men are anywhere, and I’m allowed to go in, because I’m the owner of the pageant and therefore I’m inspecting it,” Trump said... “‘Is everyone OK’? You know, they’re standing there with no clothes. ‘Is everybody OK?’ And you see these incredible looking women, and so I sort of get away with things like that.”

  10. #10
    Sage
    pbrauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-27-15 @ 03:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,394

    Re: 10 Years On, Paul Wolfowitz Admits U.S. Bungled in Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    The major problem with the conduct of the war in Iraq was the actions of Paul Bremer after the fall of Saddam. Bush and Cheney were right, the people of Iraq welcomed the US soldiers with open arms and cheered them as liberators. However, Bremer allowed the Iraqi military to be dispanded, allowed them to take their weapons with them, and sent them off with no jobs and no opportunities. Inner City Chicago can tell you what happens with a highly armed young population with no hopes.

    What followed was a ransacking of all Iraqi government historical sites and treasures as well as gangs with guns roaming the streets killing, raping and pillaging the country. It's pretty hard to set up a transitional government that was more feared and dangerous than Saddam's but Bremer found a way.

    In those early days, the war for "hearts and minds" was largely lost and resulted in a decade of additional US life and treasure being lost in Iraq.
    What I found amazing was that President Bush thought Iraq was populated with a homogenous group of Muslims , he didn't realize there was animosity between the Sunni and the Shia, which was the major cause of the civil war in 2007.

Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •