• Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
New posts

30A Skunkape

Skunky
Jan 18, 2006
10,322
2,353
55
Backatown Seagrove
Here is an interesting article:
Insider: Missteps Soured Iraqis on U.S.
By CHARLES J. HANLEY, AP Special Correspondent

document.write(getElapsed("20070409T060853Z"));6 hours agoUPDATED 5 HOURS 9 MINUTES AGO
NEW YORK - In a rueful reflection on what might have been, an Iraqi government insider details in 500 pages the U.S. occupation's "shocking" mismanagement of his country _ a performance so bad, he writes, that by 2007 Iraqis had "turned their backs on their would-be liberators."
"The corroded and corrupt state of Saddam was replaced by the corroded, inefficient, incompetent and corrupt state of the new order," Ali A. Allawi concludes in "The Occupation of Iraq," newly published by Yale University Press.
Allawi writes with authority as a member of that "new order," having served as Iraq's trade, defense and finance minister at various times since 2003. As a former academic, at Oxford University before the U.S.-British invasion of Iraq, he also writes with unusual detachment.
The U.S.- and British-educated engineer and financier is the first senior Iraqi official to look back at book length on his country's four-year ordeal. It's an unsparing look at failures both American and Iraqi, an account in which the word "ignorance" crops up repeatedly.
First came the "monumental ignorance" of those in Washington pushing for war in 2002 without "the faintest idea" of Iraq's realities. "More perceptive people knew instinctively that the invasion of Iraq would open up the great fissures in Iraqi society," he writes.
What followed was the "rank amateurism and swaggering arrogance" of the occupation, under L. Paul Bremer's Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), which took big steps with little consultation with Iraqis, steps Allawi and many others see as blunders:
_ The Americans disbanded Iraq's army, which Allawi said could have helped quell a rising insurgency in 2003. Instead, hundreds of thousands of demobilized, angry men became a recruiting pool for the resistance.
_ Purging tens of thousands of members of toppled President Saddam Hussein's Baath party _ from government, school faculties and elsewhere _ left Iraq short on experienced hands at a crucial time.
_ An order consolidating decentralized bank accounts at the Finance Ministry bogged down operations of Iraq's many state-owned enterprises.
_ The CPA's focus on private enterprise allowed the "commercial gangs" of Saddam's day to monopolize business.
_ Its free-trade policy allowed looted Iraqi capital equipment to be spirited away across borders.
_ The CPA perpetuated Saddam's fuel subsidies, selling gasoline at giveaway prices and draining the budget.
In his 2006 memoir of the occupation, Bremer wrote that senior U.S. generals wanted to recall elements of the old Iraqi army in 2003, but were rebuffed by the Bush administration. Bremer complained generally that his authority was undermined by Washington's "micromanagement."
Although Allawi, a cousin of Ayad Allawi, Iraq's prime minister in 2004, is a member of a secularist Shiite Muslim political grouping, his well-researched book betrays little partisanship.
On U.S. reconstruction failures _ in electricity, health care and other areas documented by Washington's own auditors _ Allawi writes that the Americans' "insipid retelling of `success' stories" merely hid "the huge black hole that lay underneath."
For their part, U.S. officials have often largely blamed Iraq's explosive violence for the failures of reconstruction and poor governance.
The author has been instrumental since 2005 in publicizing extensive corruption within Iraq's "new order," including an $800-million Defense Ministry scandal. Under Saddam, he writes, the secret police kept would-be plunderers in check better than the U.S. occupiers have done.
As 2007 began, Allawi concludes, "America's only allies in Iraq were those who sought to manipulate the great power to their narrow advantage. It might have been otherwise."
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.[/QUOTE]

Mango, this article makes my point. Pointing out that there were huge mistakes made in the campaign is pointing out the painfully obvious. So again, what do we do now? That is all that matters at this point.
 

Uncle Timmy

Beach Fanatic
Nov 15, 2004
1,013
32
Blue Mountain Beach
Well let?s first realize that there are no clean solutions to Iraq. All the options available are ugly and I don?t make any claims that my suggestion isn?t full of holes ?but here?s the best I can come up with.

The US should reinstate the Sunni dominated government of pre-invasion Iraq:

-Not the former top tier officials but all the civil servants who know how to actually run the country.
-Reinstate the Sunni dominated Armed Forces of Iraq.
-We ?pay off? this new government to the tune of 5-12 billion a year so they will act in American interests. This is similar to the existing US relationship with Egypt. They don?t challenge our regional interests and we get to base forces at one or two key bases in country to maintain a regional military presence. The new gov?t officials will be fat and happy with American dollars and will work aggressively to maintain the status quo.
-We turn a blind eye to the ugly reality of how the new Sunni gov?t re-instates order in the country.
-The Kurdish area of northern Iraq should not be placed under this new gov?t.- it should remain an autonomous region within Iraq with an eventual goal of establishing an independent Kurdistan. This will require delicate negotiations with Turkey (who have a substantial Kurdish minority of their own) and so the US should throw support for Turkish entry into the EU as a ?sweetner? for ending Ankara?s opposition to a free Kurdish state on their border.


The key flaw in this plan is that it is likely only going to work in the short term. It produces yet another round of violence and oppression by a US-supported regime and forces us to meddle in the affairs of a middle eastern country, yet again. And so, phase II of my plan would be

The US should move aggressively and methodically towards energy independence.

-Most fossil fuels are projected to run out within a generation, (see figures below)
Years of production left in the ground with the most optimistic reserve estimates (Oil & Gas Journal, World Oil)
  • Oil: 1,277,702/77/365= 32 years
  • Gas: 1,239,000/47/365= 72 years
  • Coal: 4,786,000/52/365= 252 years

And so we are going to be facing this task anyway; lets start early and allow ourselves to extricate the US from the nasty necessity of meddling in Mid-East affairs as an bonus.

And finally, since Afghanistan is the true festering, open sore of international terrorism-

The US should re-energize its commitment to re-build Afghanistan.
 

Bob

SoWal Insider
Nov 16, 2004
10,366
1,391
O'Wal
Uncle Timmy, How about the "We are Stuck". option I see playing out. Those creating this mess now cry out "what's your solution?" as a defense to the continued occupation. We may move our troops around geograhically in the neighborhood, but for all practical purposes, we are stuck in that region for the long haul. Half our country prefers this, as they think the status quo is manageable through force. Too bad it may take 4-5 dollar gas to move us off our spoiled rear ends, but we have set ourselves up for this quandry.
 

Uncle Timmy

Beach Fanatic
Nov 15, 2004
1,013
32
Blue Mountain Beach
Oh and I?ll add Part IV to my plan.

In order to quickly reduce the enormous amount of anti-American sentiment in the region (again, I believe we can not risk the overthrow of the pro-American regimes) I would shift US policy on the Arab-Israeli conflict.

-Endorse the Saudi Peace Proposal, which in effect the Arab countries offer Israel a full peace in exchange for a withdrawl to 1967 borders.

-Make clear the International Community?s commitment to this peace plan and to buffer the somewhat weakened military position it puts Israel by allowing Israel admission into NATO.

-Allow the creation of a Palestinian state.

-End the expansion of Israeli settlements in the occupied territories. Allow existing settlements to remain, but under Palestinian authority. (under strict security guarantees). This is a tough part of the plan, but millions of Arabs live within Israel so a million or so Israelis can live within what is recognized as Palestine.

-Palestinians will be asked to give up ?the right of return? issue in exchange for billions of dollars in US aid money.

I believe that this would go a long way to diffuse the tension in the mid-east. And, I believe it is the fair and correct policy for the US.

 

Uncle Timmy

Beach Fanatic
Nov 15, 2004
1,013
32
Blue Mountain Beach
Uncle Timmy, How about the "We are Stuck". option I see playing out. Those creating this mess now cry out "what's your solution?" as a defense to the continued occupation. We may move our troops around geograhically in the neighborhood, but for all practical purposes, we are stuck in that region for the long haul. Half our country prefers this, as they think the status quo is manageable through force. Too bad it may take 4-5 dollar gas to move us off our spoiled rear ends, but we have set ourselves up for this quandry.

I have a bad feeling that the status quo is quickly degenerating into status 'uh-oh'.
 

Bob

SoWal Insider
Nov 16, 2004
10,366
1,391
O'Wal
Oh and I?ll add Part IV to my plan.

In order to quickly reduce the enormous amount of anti-American sentiment in the region (again, I believe we can not risk the overthrow of the pro-American regimes) I would shift US policy on the Arab-Israeli conflict.

-Endorse the Saudi Peace Proposal, which in effect the Arab countries offer Israel a full peace in exchange for a withdrawl to 1967 borders.

-Make clear the International Community?s commitment to this peace plan and to buffer the somewhat weakened military position it puts Israel by allowing Israel admission into NATO.

-Allow the creation of a Palestinian state.

-End the expansion of Israeli settlements in the occupied territories. Allow existing settlements to remain, but under Palestinian authority. (under strict security guarantees). This is a tough part of the plan, but millions of Arabs live within Israel so a million or so Israelis can live within what is recognized as Palestine.

-Palestinians will be asked to give up ?the right of return? issue in exchange for billions of dollars in US aid money.

I believe that this would go a long way to diffuse the tension in the mid-east. And, I believe it is the fair and correct policy for the US.

Israel is not going to do the right thing here, and may very well bomb Iran over nuclear fears. Too much hatred,religion, and money for one small area of the world!
 

Uncle Timmy

Beach Fanatic
Nov 15, 2004
1,013
32
Blue Mountain Beach
Israel is not going to do the right thing here, and may very well bomb Iran over nuclear fears. Too much hatred,religion, and money for one small area of the world!

True, but I'm advocating a unilateral US position here.

Israel gets 1/3 of the total US foreign aid budget per year, that gives us a lot of power to dictate policy.

It is a matter of American will; based on our national interests, not Israeli wishes.

If they don't agree, I say we pull the plug on the billions of annual dollars sent to them.
 

Miss Kitty

Meow
Jun 10, 2005
47,011
1,131
71
-The Kurdish area of northern Iraq should not be placed under this new gov?t.- it should remain an autonomous region within Iraq with an eventual goal of establishing an independent Kurdistan. This will require delicate negotiations with Turkey (who have a substantial Kurdish minority of their own) and so the US should throw support for Turkish entry into the EU as a ?sweetner? for ending Ankara?s opposition to a free Kurdish state on their border.

...from Uncle Timmy

Uncle Timmy...isn't most or all of the oil in Iraq located in the north along with the Kurds?
 

Smiling JOe

SoWal Expert
Nov 18, 2004
31,644
1,773
So what do we do (aside from ditching our cars in favor of bicycles and such, of course)?
I have your answer. We sell pay per view showings of Bush vs. Iraq's best terrorist, in a no holds barred, no weapons allowed, caged fight until the death. Half of all proceeds will go back to the taxpayers of the US who are paying out of the @ss for this GWB war, and the other half goes to the citizens of Iraq to help rebuild the mess we made. Whomever survives the fight is declared the victor, and their team wins.

"Johnny, tell them what they have won!"

"Well Bob, they have won absolutely nothing."

Then we pull the troops out and go back to normal business.
 

Smiling JOe

SoWal Expert
Nov 18, 2004
31,644
1,773
I am puzzled why they can have definitive plans on taxes, healthcare, social safety nets but are adrift in focus groups when it comes to the (in my opinion) most pressing issue of the day:dunno:

Skunky, again the answer is easy -- They are all crooks.
 
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter