Monday, April 10, 2006
The Democrats Do Not Have a Unified Plan for Iraq
Republicans create an impossible mess with no good answers and then want to criticise the Dems for not having a unified answer. How exactly are we supposed to have a unified answer for a problem that has no good answers? We don't know what to do. Well, we have a plan - I guess, but it is not really a plan, plan. See: Democratic Plan
A lot of us have good ideas - but no consensus. That is the whole point. This incompetent president has led us into a no-win situation. We went to war for the wrong reasons. We went to war in the wrong way. We fought the war in the wrong way. We managed Iraq in the wrong way after we "won." We iced out international partners that could have helped. And now there is little doubt that we will leave Iraq in the wrong way. There is no "right way" to leave Iraq.
The best metaphor that I can think of for this Republican created mess is: You meet a women. You seduce her with vows to love, honor, and cherish until the end of time. She enters a deep psychosis and you dump her. Except in this case we date raped Iraq to begin with (Rumsfeld's idea of seduction) - no wonder she is nuts. We probably do need to leave her - she'll kill us if we don't. But she will stalk us if we do. It is a mess. There is no good answer. The divorce will be expensive and ugly. She is going to take all of our treasure. But what are we going to do? Our friends tried to tell us to stay away from her... They said she was nothing but trouble... But we had to listen to our "little head" (Bush) - (he has the brains of a penis) - (some vulgar person might say dickhead) - (and the Downing Street Memo proves that he was certainly hot for her).
We went to war for the wrong reasons:I actually cannot support this assertion. I cannot support it because we really do not know why we went to war. We know that Bush / Cheney / Rumsfeld were in a headlong rush to war from the very start of the Bush regime. We know that they were not straight with the American people. (Maybe that is why they are so "freaked out" by gays - because they are not "straight" - sorry - couldn't resist the play on words - anyhow...) We know that they cherry picked intelligence and played games with the UN and the UN inspectors... Maybe Baby Bush wanted to "show up" his daddy... Maybe the reason's were idiotic idea-logic... Maybe the reasons were geopolitical oil politics and war profiteering... Maybe there was a good reason (probably not)... We just don't know. We know that the real reasons were not presented to the American people. We sent our beloved sons and daughters to die in far off lands on the basis of lies - for reasons unknown.
We went to war in the wrong way:In the commentary thread to Jack's article titled, "The good guys are winning in Iraq" which he posted on 10-21-05, I wrote:
We fought the war in the wrong way: In the same commentary thread from Jack's article listed above, I wrote:
We managed Iraq in the wrong way after we "won." Of coarse this overlaps with; no-bid contracts, disbanding the Iraqi Army, AbuGhireb, not enough body armor, and not enough troops, but I would add: Micro-managing the war by political civilian leadership (Rumsfeld), for political civilian reasons, that prevented the military from making the necessary strategic and force adjustments to deal with the mess that we sent them into. The same mistake we made in Vietnam... If you are going to tell the Generals to fight a war - you need to take the "gloves off" and let them fight it. Bush does a good job of giving lip service to this idea, but the reality is quite different. For example, they did not send in enough troops because of the political ramifications. They needed to convince the American people that it would be quick, cheap, and easy. In reality, competent leaders, if they were going to lead us to war, would have done the exact opposite. They would have prepared the American people by explaining in detail that it would or could be long, extremely costly, and painful. But the American people would not have supported the truth so they micro-managed the military for political purposes - and they got their war - and now our sons and daughters are dying in far lands on the basis of lies, for reasons unknown.
We iced out international partners that could have helped.Even after the war, we could have gotten France, Germany, and Russia to support the rebuilding of Iraq, but we wanted all of the plunder for Haliburton, so we iced them out of the rebuilding contracts. God, we could use them now - but now - it is too late. We wanted the plunder - instead - our treasure is being plundered. Senator Joe Biden still thinks that it would possible to get regional powers to participate int he stabilization of Iraq - but it won't happen until we have "regime change" in Washington DC. See: Biden Video.
And now there is little doubt that we will leave Iraq in the wrong way.Bush is already drawing troops out. Iraq is descending into civil war, and he is drawing the troops out. And... he is probably right... as mentioned above - I don't know what to do - but it is obvious that he is drawing them out for political reasons - because the war is unpopular - which is the wrong reason. We need competent leadership, like Biden, Murtha, or Weasley Clark ¶ 1:33 PM
A lot of us have good ideas - but no consensus. That is the whole point. This incompetent president has led us into a no-win situation. We went to war for the wrong reasons. We went to war in the wrong way. We fought the war in the wrong way. We managed Iraq in the wrong way after we "won." We iced out international partners that could have helped. And now there is little doubt that we will leave Iraq in the wrong way. There is no "right way" to leave Iraq.
The best metaphor that I can think of for this Republican created mess is: You meet a women. You seduce her with vows to love, honor, and cherish until the end of time. She enters a deep psychosis and you dump her. Except in this case we date raped Iraq to begin with (Rumsfeld's idea of seduction) - no wonder she is nuts. We probably do need to leave her - she'll kill us if we don't. But she will stalk us if we do. It is a mess. There is no good answer. The divorce will be expensive and ugly. She is going to take all of our treasure. But what are we going to do? Our friends tried to tell us to stay away from her... They said she was nothing but trouble... But we had to listen to our "little head" (Bush) - (he has the brains of a penis) - (some vulgar person might say dickhead) - (and the Downing Street Memo proves that he was certainly hot for her).
We went to war for the wrong reasons:I actually cannot support this assertion. I cannot support it because we really do not know why we went to war. We know that Bush / Cheney / Rumsfeld were in a headlong rush to war from the very start of the Bush regime. We know that they were not straight with the American people. (Maybe that is why they are so "freaked out" by gays - because they are not "straight" - sorry - couldn't resist the play on words - anyhow...) We know that they cherry picked intelligence and played games with the UN and the UN inspectors... Maybe Baby Bush wanted to "show up" his daddy... Maybe the reason's were idiotic idea-logic... Maybe the reasons were geopolitical oil politics and war profiteering... Maybe there was a good reason (probably not)... We just don't know. We know that the real reasons were not presented to the American people. We sent our beloved sons and daughters to die in far off lands on the basis of lies - for reasons unknown.
We went to war in the wrong way:In the commentary thread to Jack's article titled, "The good guys are winning in Iraq" which he posted on 10-21-05, I wrote:
The problem is this: This worthless #$^%%# dry drunk piece of $%^$## incompetent commander and chief is rapidly creating a situation where we cannot win. As listed above the American people were not adequately prepared to make the sacrifices necessary to win. The American people are losing patience with the war and will soon demand our withdrawal. We went in without enough troops.To that I would add that, as a result of our refusal to allow the UN inspectors to finish their work - because we already had a date penciled in to start bombing - we failed to build a real coalition. We sent our troops in without enough armor. We had a great plan for war, but no plan for peace. Well our great plan worked. We have got war.
We fought the war in the wrong way: In the same commentary thread from Jack's article listed above, I wrote:
We disbanded the Iraqi army there by leaving weapons all over the country for insurgents and creating millions of unemployed disaffected young men. We gave no-bid contracts to Haliburton instead of employing Iraqis. Bush either knew or should have known about the torture in Abu Ghireb. The list is just endless.
It is possible that we will still have a good outcome in Iraq in spite of the incompetence, lies and amorality of this corrupt administration... however if we do have a good outcome, 100% of the credit belongs to the courageous American soldiers and to the noble intentions of the American people who may win this in spite of President King George the Second. It steadily becoming increasingly unlikely… less troops then the Generals wanted, Rumsfeld setting the preconditions for torture at Abu Ghireb and Gitmo, failing to train Iraqi security forces fast enough, disbanding the Iraqi Army, giving no bid contracts to Haliburton instead of local Iraqi contractors, failing to rebuild, failing to create a real coalition, lies, lies and more lies, and on and on,
We managed Iraq in the wrong way after we "won." Of coarse this overlaps with; no-bid contracts, disbanding the Iraqi Army, AbuGhireb, not enough body armor, and not enough troops, but I would add: Micro-managing the war by political civilian leadership (Rumsfeld), for political civilian reasons, that prevented the military from making the necessary strategic and force adjustments to deal with the mess that we sent them into. The same mistake we made in Vietnam... If you are going to tell the Generals to fight a war - you need to take the "gloves off" and let them fight it. Bush does a good job of giving lip service to this idea, but the reality is quite different. For example, they did not send in enough troops because of the political ramifications. They needed to convince the American people that it would be quick, cheap, and easy. In reality, competent leaders, if they were going to lead us to war, would have done the exact opposite. They would have prepared the American people by explaining in detail that it would or could be long, extremely costly, and painful. But the American people would not have supported the truth so they micro-managed the military for political purposes - and they got their war - and now our sons and daughters are dying in far lands on the basis of lies, for reasons unknown.
We iced out international partners that could have helped.Even after the war, we could have gotten France, Germany, and Russia to support the rebuilding of Iraq, but we wanted all of the plunder for Haliburton, so we iced them out of the rebuilding contracts. God, we could use them now - but now - it is too late. We wanted the plunder - instead - our treasure is being plundered. Senator Joe Biden still thinks that it would possible to get regional powers to participate int he stabilization of Iraq - but it won't happen until we have "regime change" in Washington DC. See: Biden Video.
And now there is little doubt that we will leave Iraq in the wrong way.Bush is already drawing troops out. Iraq is descending into civil war, and he is drawing the troops out. And... he is probably right... as mentioned above - I don't know what to do - but it is obvious that he is drawing them out for political reasons - because the war is unpopular - which is the wrong reason. We need competent leadership, like Biden, Murtha, or Weasley Clark ¶ 1:33 PM
