US warned it faces 'third Gulf War' in Iraq

[Tinoire]

Forty-nine coalition troops have been killed by militants in Iraq since the beginning of May, and attacks average 10 to 20 a day throughout the country. General John Abizaid, the new commander of Centcom, on July 16 became the first senior US official to acknowledge that what the coalition faces in Iraq is a "classical guerrilla campaign".

A study on guerrilla warfare in Iraq by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a Washington think-tank, blames bad planning by the US administration and the low priority given to "conflict termination" and nation-building strategies by the Pentagon.

<snip>

Mr Cordesman offers a grim assessment of the future of the Iraqi conflict: "The most likely case still seems to be a mixed and poorly co-ordinated US nation-building effort that does just enough to put Iraq on a better political and economic path, but does so in a climate of constant low-level security threats and serious Iraqi ethnic and sectarian tensions."

The Pentagon's policymakers saw the Clinton administration's focus on nation-building as a waste of resources, the report says.

<snip>

http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1058868192504&p=1012571727102

[ze_dscherman]

1. Cordesman warned before the war of very poor planning

His report "Planning for a Self-Inflicted Wound" http://www.csis.org/features/iraq_wound.pdf
published 31-12-02 is pretelling many of the failures the U.S. fell for in planning the post-war period. Those in charge did not listen to his warnings, they will not listen now - sectarians never admit they are wrong.

The hardest part of war is often the peace, and this is particularly likely to be the case if the US goes to war with Iraq. It is not that the US is not planning for such contingencies; it is the quality of such planning that is at issue. Unless it sharply improves, it may well become a self-inflicted wound based on a series of “syndromes” that grow out of ignorance, indifference to Iraq’s real needs, and ethnocentricity.

The US does not have to suffer from “Iraq War Peace Syndrome.” Some good studies and planning efforts are emerging, but they are the exception and not the norm, in an uncoordinated and faltering effort. Far too often, we are rushing our planning efforts without making adequate efforts to make up for our lack of knowledge. As a result, planners both outside and inside the US government may end up doing more harm than good, and in laying the groundwork for serious postwar friction and problems. In fact, a pattern of Iraq war peace syndromes has begun to emerge that is deeply disturbing.

[saigon68]

7. NO GUERILLA WAR //

Didn't Wolfie or Rumbdumb say a week ago, that NO GUERILLA WAR was going ON????

[seemslikeadream]

15. Rummy don't do guerilla's

[Mokito]

19. No, you didn't listen closely enough

He said there was no GORILLA-WAR going on in Vie, err, Iraq. See he's not lying or spinning anything, true as could be...sheesh :eyes:

[Jackpine Radical]

24. Right. Ain't no gorilla war.

It's a chimp war.

[Thor_MN]

33. There was more planning on how to "Embed" journalists

to control their output than what to do after the "war" was over.

[0007]

2. Can Iraq sign the Peace Tready NOW?

Aw, never mind!

[classics]

3. Is the president in his office with his fingers in his ears?

Going 'la la la la la la I cant hear you! Its not a war if I dont say it is! la la la la la la!'

[teryang]

4. With all due respect to Cordesman

...the idea that you can invade a country without legal justification after a propaganda campaign known to be a tissue of lies and then expect to "win the peace" is total nonsense. The polls in Arab nations immediately prior to the invasion showed clearly that the Americans had no credibility in the Arab world. The expectation that we would be well received there after a war, ten years of sanctions, at least five years of lies, and then a brutal invasion is patently ridiculous.

We went in there to seize resources, territory and markets for imperial corporatists drunk with absolute power and delusions of world domination. There is no avoiding the mortal consequences except to give the whole matter over to the UN, including the distribution of energy resources and contracts and pull out.

[4dsc]

5. Well put...

You know how to hit the nail on the head, I'd say..

[RapidCreek]

8. Nicely said Teryang!

RC

[yowzayowzayowza]

11. To be fair...

We also denied a thug the opportunity to convert proceeds from the second largest oil reserve on the planet to as many black-market Russian nukes as he wanted. Instead of Saddamn controlling the reserves the BFEE seems to think they can weasle their way in.
Simply walking away from Iraq was not an option.

[Dhalgren]

12. So how would you like your draft?

Heavy on the ethnics and hold the rich? What's the golden number brfore "declaring victory" and pulling out? 10,000 US casualties? 20,000? We will be no more loved nor have provided "stability" ten years from now anymore than we have right now. So it's just a matter of how many dead American troops is considered the "good" effort.

[yowzayowzayowza]

14. Multilateral.

M'kay?

[Dhalgren]

16. Won't happen.

Not as long as BFEE keep control of the oil - and they will not let go of the only reason we fought the war! Who is going to send troops into a meat grinder in order for the BFEE to profit from stollen oil? M'kay.

[yowzayowzayowza]

20. Totally agree.

"Who is going to send troops into a meat grinder in order for the BFEE to profit from stollen oil?"

Don't look like Merikanz are gunna stand for that fer too long.

[Eloriel]

18. That WASN'T the "other choice," yowza, and I would hope you know it

The "other choice" was continued inspections and continued (I said CONTINUED) containment, because obviously containment was working very well indeed.

Of course, neither of those choices gave Bush his first and only choice, which was the rape of those natural resources (read: OIL) himself.

Eloriel

[yowzayowzayowza]

22. Unfortunately, not working very well.

Like it or not, continued containment alone was never going to produce a situation which would support large scale extraction of those natural resources. Saddamn's presence precludes it. I certainly do not support the maladministrations unilateral approach, but something was gunna have to give sometime. How long would you have the Iraqi people suffer to keep a boot at Saddamn's throat? I thought Clinton should have made strides to bridge the gap with Iran. Like Nixon and China, Clinton should have gone to Iran to push for peace with the Iranian people and at least admitted our meddling in their affairs.

[alfredo]

26. It was starting to happen. Clinton had

started making gestures to Iran, and Iran seemed to accept his offers. Of course Bush would have nothing to do with peace. Total war is Bush's policy.

[mbperrin]

23. Eloriel, you have hit

the nail on the head. The BFEE needs the oil for money. We don't need it - using existing technology, we could cut our need for oil in half and eliminate any need for ME oil at all, but the BFEE couldn't make money that way!

The good part is, all the oil everywhere in the world will simply be used up within 20 years, and then this whole problem can be over.

[jpak]

27. Why would Russia sell I-raq nukuler weapons???

That is just plain stupid.

Why would they release nuclear weapons to a "terrorist state" that could potentially turn them over to Chechen "terrorists"?

The Russians make more money exporting their own oil and gas than they ever could exporting nukes to Saddam.

What little they would reap financially would be overwhelmed by the blow-back threat they would pose to their own security.

Again stupid stupid logic.

[yowzayowzayowza]

31. Release?

"Black-market Russian nukes" would not have to be intentionally released by the Russian government. Indeed, stolen Russian newquelar material has already been found on the black-market. With unlimited funds at Sadamnz disposal, you're likely to see a lot more scarey stuff shake loose.

"That is just plain stupid." "Again stupid stupid logic"

Whatever, dude.

[jpak]

32. More stupid logic

If "Black Market Russian Nukes" were the threat, then invading I-raq would not solve the problem.

Saudi Arabia has more oil than I-raq and they possess a substantial arsenal of Chinese ballistic missiles. What is to stop the Saudis - who funded 9/11 - from acquiring these "easily obtained" Russian nukes.

Or the Libyans, or the Evil-Iranians, or the Chechens, or the UAE, or Bahrain, or the Columbian Coke Cartel, or the North Koreans, or Quebec any other international "evil doers" from obtaining these weapons????

230+ US soldiers dead, 7000+ I-raqi civilians dead and $4 billion a month to fund this quagmire hasn't solved that stupid problem.

Again stupid stupid stupid logic.

[yowzayowzayowza]

34. Yer missin' the point.

The nukes are not the threat. The threat is a proven INTERNATIONAL thug with long term access to MASSIVE world-class wealth. As much as I hate to agree with the maladministration, simply walkin' away leavin' Saddamn with that kinda capital would be irresponsible in the extreme. Further, puttin' a fence around and over him indefinitely does a disservice to the Iraqi people.

Again, whatever, Dude.

[jpak]

35. Johnny-Come-Lately GOP Saddam haters are pathetic

If the Saddam-is-a-bad-man argument was a valid excuse for war in 2003 it was a valid case in 1983...

...when Rummy went to Bagdad on behalf of the reagan adm., shook his evil hand (with an equally evil grin on his face) and reopened diplomatic relations with the motherfucker.

Saddam was a bad man when reagan sent DOD and DIA advisors to Baghdad to aid in Saddams illegal and brutal war against I-ran.

Saddam was a bad man when reagan released satellite recon photos to I-raq to aid in planning chemical weapons attacks against the I-ranians - and we knew he was doing it.

Saddam was a bad man when reagan sold the motherfucker anthrax inoculum and other nasties for his bioweapons program

Saddam was a bad man when he killed 37 sailors aboard the USS Stark and reagan did nothing in retaliation.

Saddam was a bad man when Poppy Bush concluded a billion dollar trade deal with the motherfucker that enriched his GOP friends and sold technology to the motherfucker for his WMD programs.

Saddam was an evil motherfucker when reagan/bush gave him $4 billion in "agricultural loans" to fund his WMD programs.

Saddam was a bad man when a GOP Congressional delegation visited him in 1990 and told him "You don't have a problem with us - you only have a problem with that evil liberal US press".

Saddam was an evil motherfucker when Poppy's State Dept declared that the US had no obligation to defend Kuwait on the eve of the I-raqi invasion.

Saddam was a motherfucker when Poppy told the I-raqis to overthrow him in the aftermath of the Gulf War - and let them be slaughtered by the tens of thousands.

Saddam was a bad man when Trent Lott opposed Clintions Operation Desert Fox.

And Finally

Saddam was an evil piece of shit when Dickless Cheney circumvented sanctions against I-raq and did $78 million worth of business with the motherfucker in 1998.

I have little patience with O'Reilly Talking Points when it comes to Johnny-Come-Lately Saddam haters....

[yowzayowzayowza]

36. That WE have been and are presently being ...

...lead by thugs with scruples bearing little disceranble difference from Saddamn's does not justify either indirectly indefinitely punishing the Iraqi people or surrendering an unprecidented amount of POWER to be used against us at some future date. That the current situation is certainly worse than continued containment does not mean that a truely multinational humanitarian-based effort to remove Sadamn and rehabilitate Iraq would not have been preferable.

Plz stow the Johnny-Come-bullshit. TIA.

[Tinoire]

37. YOWZA!

:wow: Is this the new talking point?! :wow:

That the man had money which it would have been "irresponsible in the extreme" to leave in his hands?!

So to separate a man from his money, we destroy an entire civilization, destroy an entire country, isolate ourselves from the world community losing long-time allies, run our country into a debt neither we nor our children can afford, reap generations of hatred and mistrust from the world over, kill innocent men, women and children, traumatize our own military men that thousands of them have already deserted while many of those who've returned sit around with vacant stares unable to re-bond with their families?

:puke: :puke: :puke:


IS THIS HOW WE NOW JUSTIFY THIS OBSCENE WAR? TO SEPARATE A MAN FROM HIS MONEY? AND BTW, WHERE IS ALL THAT MONEY? IT SURE AIN'T BUYING WATER OR A SINGLE MEAL FOR OUR TROOPS OR THE IRAQI PEOPLE? WHERE IS ALL THAT LOVELY MONEY?

We shall reap what we sowed. When the bill comes, go stand in front of a mirror and weep.

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[yowzayowzayowza]

39. Plz see post 36.

I am not justifying THIS war.

[izzie]

6. Is it not odd that we have not seen GOP run the landing of Wimp 2

We need to see the landing and speech a few more times. How much did that little staged show cost the tax payers? It is like the sub trips for friends of Bush. Why do we not know the cost of these things when they always had these cost listed on Clinton?

[RapidCreek]

9. God I wish I owned a network

I'd show the mission accomplished clip before and after the death toll every night.

RC

[JaneQPublic]

21. CBS News did that very thing this weekend

Joie Chen did a piece showing the clip of Chimpy in his flightsuit and codpiece, followed by an array of photos of servicemembers killed since his "Mission Accomplished" speech.

I'm sure the "Mission Accomplished" clip will be shown by every news organization on the day the number of G.I.'s killed AFTER Chimpy said the war was over finally surpasses the number killed before his speech, during the "real" war.

[dbt]

10. Here's A Better Headline:

US Faces Second Viet Nam In Iraq

:freak:
dbt

[stellarwind]

13. During the Gore/Bush debates

Bush said he would not partake in nation building. Unfortunately for the Iraqi people, he has kept his word.

[Minstrel Boy]

17. How about a "new" Gulf War every month?

That way they can reset the death counter every 30 days.

[skip fox]

25. They are just about to ask the RIGHT question.

They assume that they are being attacked exclusively
by Saddam loyalists. But Peter Bergman said a few
weeks ago that Iraq is now a magnet for al-Quaeda, having
150,000 of their favorite targets out in the open.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

28. Third Gulf War???

:wtf: is this??? We now have a third war on our hands. Gee, and to think, Sean Hannity wants us to thank our great Fruher for his work??? Ha, Ha, Ha! No way in hell! Bush has made us a great big mess and embarrased us in front of the world! Thank You Mr. pResident for getting us into this hole!!!

[MRDU]

29. World War lV

Didn't X-CIA director James Woolsey state “The United States is engaged in World War IV."
Well, which is it, Gulf War3 or WW4?

[Tinoire]

38. World War IV

... I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." -Albert Einstein

Gulf War I was WW III.

[JasonBerry]

30. Someone Posted This In Editorials

http://amconmag.com/07_28_03/buchanan.html

The concensus in that thread was that we just HATE IT to have to agree with Buchanan - but he is right on in this new column. I would have to agree. Ouch!