Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Thomas A Watson who wrote (55738)	3/24/2008 6:23:08 AM
From: NAG1	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 543262

<<The initial rebuilding did not go well because the military's past decades of training simply did not address the current situation. The military adapted and thing are better and getting better and the time frame was amazingly quick.>> Thomas, The initial rebuilding didn't go well because the Bush administration didn't listen to their people on the ground, specifically, Gen. Garner. He wanted to pay the old military to keep them off the field of battle, someone else didn't(possibly Bremer) and no one had the guts to tell Bush that the new plan was wrong. It is all documented in State of Denial by Woodward, a person who at first had written 2 books somewhat complimentary to the Bush White House. I think the main reason that things have improved right now is that we are now paying some of the Iraqis, something that should have been done years ago. And to think it only took about 4000 Americans dead and thousands others wounded and a half trillion dollars in order to reach a conclusion that they should have reached 5 years ago. The military is doing its usual same excellent job it was doing 5 years ago. It was politics that undermined them. Neal

To: Thomas A Watson who wrote (55738)	3/24/2008 1:41:23 PM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 543262

<<<The considered opinion of all was that Saddam was not bluffing and had WMD. there is a large group who seem to igore this fact and must go on and on about lying this and that.>>> Nuclear capability requires complex infrastructure and a sophisticated delivery system. No one with expertise in this area thought Iraq had the capability. There was no immediate threat. Inspectors on the ground and in country could easily have found out definitively given time. Imagery of a mushroom cloud was used deceitfully. <<<The military did an outstanding job in seizing the country. The initial rebuilding did not go well because the military's past decades of training simply did not address the current situation.>>> The invasion was well executed and was a success militarily. There is no doubt about that, but the experts were asked about what was needed for the occupation. We have had successful occupations in the past. Our experts knew what was needed. We needed several hundred thousand for the size and population of Iraq. Rumsfeld said that several hundred thousand meant 300 thousand troops. He made the fatal misjudgement that we only needed 100,000. He thought he knew better than his own military experts. That was a political and not a military mistake. The other mistake was also political. People in Bush's own administration thought that it would take several hundred billion dollars to win the war and secure Iraq, but politicians in the administration wanted to fight the war and occupation on the cheap ($50B instead of the several hundred billion dollars estimated by the wh advisor who was subsequently fired for making that estimate). No one is blaming the military. They did everything they were asked to do. The politicians (Bush administration) screwed up.