How democrats lose wars we have already won...

how the PBS special "Losing Iraq" unquestionably demonstrates that Obama is responsible for losing the War in Iraq. In this thread DTMB posted;

We lost Iraq and Vietnam the day we invaded.

Which I believe is probably the case. And if it wasn't an unwinnable war to start with it became a lost war the day Paul Bremer was appointed as the Bush's presidential envoy to Iraq. He quickly assumed to himself grand vizier-like powers as ruler of an American Iraqi "Raj". The monumentally bad decisions he made and disasterous policies he put in place horrifically reverberate to this day, more than 10 years later. De-Baathification, especially disbanding the Iraqi army guarenteed a dissent into sectarian violence that has only worsened with the passage of time.

Now the PBS special that LGS claims puts the blame on Obama for the continuing disaster illuminates the bad decisions that doomed the conflict to endless guagmire. If you can see past the self-serving exculpatory claims of the people who made those bad decisions the true history is a damning indictment of early mis-steps in Iraq. I'll post a partial transcript of the documentary from the first parts of the special to give you a sense of why this is my take on PBS's examination of the War. It's pretty long but worth at least skim-reading, IMO.

ANNOUNCER: Tonight, FRONTLINE investigates Losing Iraq.

Col. BRIAN McCOY, USMC (Ret.): The Iraqis had gathered around the statue and were throwing their shoes at it.

RAJIV CHANDRASEKARAN, Author, Imperial Life in the Emerald City: What struck me was the Iraqis couldn’t pull it down themselves

Col. BRIAN McCOY: It was obvious it wasn’t going to happen. It would be a pretty anti-climatic moment if we didn’t help.

BARBARA BODINE, Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance: It was a dramatic moment. It was an American flag that went on it first. That’s almost a metaphor for what’s happened since. You know, then, ultimately, well, an Iraqi flag was put on it and enough photographs were taken of Iraqi cheering.

STEVEN W. CASTEEL, Advisor to Interior Ministry: By the way, that statue was very heavy. The problem was much more involved than I think anyone thought of.

RAJIV CHANDRASEKARAN: It made me worry. Something told me, you know, this isn’t going to be quite as easy as we thought.

NARRATOR: In those early days, there was great optimism.

Col. R. ALAN KING, U.S. Army: People were just—pure exhilaration. At that point in time, you think, “This might just work.” And I remember seeing a guy with a—carrying a huge couch on his back. And he turns and says, “Yay, America!” You know?

JOHN BURNS, The New York Times: There were flowers. There were shouts of joy. There were people clambering on the tanks and kissing the tank crews. But by the time this happened, and within a matter of an hour of the Marine tanks coming up the Canal Expressway, of course, the looting had begun.

ANTHONY CORDESMAN, Ctr. for Strategic and Intl. Studies: And all of a sudden, the Iraqi people started looting, attacked the ministries, basically created a series of events, which didn’t stop with that. Less than two U.S. brigades were in isolated positions in a city of more than five million people, having no idea of what might come next.

NEWSCASTER: Iraqis are looting on a grand scale. It is a clear sign that while war might be ending, there is trouble ahead.

NARRATOR: In Washington, the Bush administration brushed aside the bad news.

DONALD RUMSFELD, Secretary of Defense: I picked up a newspaper today, and I couldn’t believe it. I read eight headlines that talked about “Chaos!” “Violence!” “Unrest!” And it just was, “Henny Penny, the sky is falling.” I’ve never seen anything like it! It’s just unbelievable how people can take that away from what is happening in that country!

NARRATOR: But behind closed doors, some of Rumsfeld’s generals were worried.
Gen. JACK KEANE, Army Vice Chief of Staff, 1999-03: In ‘03, from a military perspective, from the time we took the regime down, we never made a commitment to secure the population. And we never had enough resources to do it.

NARRATOR: General Jack Keane was acting Army chief of staff.

THOMAS RICKS, Author, Fiasco: General Keane is really highly admired across the Army. He’s kind of a soldier’s soldier. And he had argued in the tank before the invasion of Iraq, “Don’t invade Iraq."

NARRATOR: Looking back, Keane says that the war plans drafted by Secretary Rumsfeld and commanding general Tommy Franks did not include adequate plans for securing the country.

Gen. JACK KEANE: I think it’s driven, in part, by my own failures when I was there as a senior military leader contributing to General Franks’s plan, that we never even considered an insurgency as a reasonable option.

NARRATOR: On the ground, even as tensions were rising, General Franks had a surprise announcement.

MICHAEL GORDON, Co-author, Endgame: A very striking thing happened. General Franks gave guidance that his commanders should be prepared to withdraw all American forces, except for a little more than a division which would remain, by September 2003

NARRATOR: More than 110,000 troops were told to prepare to leave. A division, about 30,000, would handle Iraq.

RAJIV CHANDRASEKARAN: There was this power vacuum. Nobody quite knew what was the plan. The soldiers thought they were all going home.

NARRATOR: It was a message the president delivered personally when he flew 30 miles off the coast of California to reassure the world that the major combat phase of the war in Iraq was over

[May 1, 2003]
Pres. GEORGE W. BUSH: My fellow Americans, major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed. Because of you, the tyrant has fallen and Iraq is free. [cheers]

THOMAS RICKS: Bush never said “mission accomplished,” but that banner was hanging up right behind his head as he gave that speech. And it really was a premature victory speech that didn’t recognize what was going on in Iraq.

NARRATOR: The administration’s strategy was to pull the troops out of Iraq and hand over responsibility to an American civilian. In Washington, Vice President Cheney’s office had just the man for the job, a little known diplomat named L. Paul Bremer III.
Amb. L. PAUL BREMER III, Administrator, CPA: Well, I was contacted by two people, Paul Wolfowitz, who was deputy secretary of defense, and Scooter Libby, who was the vice president’s chief of staff, both of whom I had known for decades.

RAJIV CHANDRASEKARAN: Bremer is old friends with Scooter Libby, who is Cheney’s chief of staff, and Libby put Bremer’s name forward. And Bremer was sort of the right kind of conservative.

NARRATOR: In Bremer, Cheney had given Secretary Rumsfeld a businessman, a diplomat, managing director of Kissinger and Associates
.
THOMAS RICKS: Here’s a guy who had worked for Henry Kissinger, but doesn’t know a whole lot about the Middle East, doesn’t speak Arabic, doesn’t know the region.

Amb. JAMES DOBBINS, Fmr. Asst. Secretary of State: What he lacked was the practical experience, and it was that lack of experience that commended him, in large measure, to the Bush administration.

Pres. GEORGE W. BUSH: Today, it’s my honor to announce that Jerry Bremer has agreed to become the presidential envoy to Iraq.

NARRATOR: President Bush made it official. Bremer was now in charge of the occupation. After a two week-crash course on Middle Eastern politics, he arrived in Iraq to head what was known as the Coalition Provisional Authority, the CPA.

L. PAUL BREMER: We flew on a C-130 into Baghdad. The thing that was striking to us was the fact that a lot of the buildings were on fire.

NARRATOR: Baghdad had been burning for one month.

MICHAEL GORDON: There’d be buildings on fire. The fires would just have to burn themselves out because there was no fire department.

Amb. CLAYTON McMANAWAY, Amb. Bremer’s Deputy: There’s no government. There were no police. The army was gone.

NARRATOR: As they drove into the city, Bremer made a decision and promptly announced it to his new staff.

L. PAUL BREMER: I did one thing that wasn’t very smart, which was suggest to the staff meeting that I thought we should shoot the looters, that our military should have authority to shoot the looters, which they did not have at that time.

DAN SENOR, Sr. Advisor to Amb. Bremer: His point was you only needed to shoot a few of them to make that point and the looting would stop.

L. PAUL BREMER: It wasn’t very smart to do because somebody on the staff immediately told the press that I had suggested shooting the looters, and we had a problem.

NARRATOR: Military commanders refused to go along with Bremer’s idea.

Col. H.R. McMASTER, U.S. Army: Well, of course, it’s against our code of honor. There just is not sufficient justification to shoot somebody because they’re carrying a computer out of the old Ministry of, you know, Education building.

NARRATOR: And so ended Paul Bremer’s first day in Iraq.

THOMAS RICKS: And I think one thing Bremer found out that day was that he had no command over the military.

NARRATOR: Bremer’s headquarters were in a heavily fortified area of Baghdad called the Green Zone.

THOMAS RICKS: The Green Zone became the Emerald City, walled off from the rest of Iraq. The rest of Iraq, electricity is intermittent at best, sewage problems, dusty, dirty, potholes. Inside the Green Zone, it’s calm, it’s quiet.

NARRATOR: As Bremer settled in, he knew he would have to deal with Iraq’s complicated sectarian politics.

Col. THOMAS X. HAMMES, Military Strategist, CPA: This is one of the most fractious places you could have picked, with more problems in terms of—it’s right on the Shia/Sunni divide. It has the Kurds. It has 20 years of dysfunctional government.

NARRATOR: Saddam Hussein and his Sunni-dominated Ba’ath Party had brutally controlled the country’s majority Shi’ites and the Kurds. Now Bremer was determined to change that.

MICHAEL GORDON: The idea is, you would remove Saddam’s agents from the government or people loyal to him, make room for Shi’ites and Kurds, who it was assumed would work together in some sort of collegial way.

NARRATOR: And Bremer had a plan to remake the Iraqi government.

Amb. ROBIN RAPHEL, Reconstruction Coordinator, CPA: Bremer hadn’t been there very long—literally a day—and these papers were coming out of his briefcase. I was in the office, outside of the front office, and began reading them, and so on.

NARRATOR: It was called CPA Order Number One. It would end Sunni domination of the government and bring in rival ethnic and religious groups, the Kurds and the Shi’ites.

Gen. JAY GARNER (Ret.), Dir., Office of Humanitarian Assistance: I’m walking down the hallway, and Ambassador Robin Raphel says, “Have you seen this?” She has a piece of paper. I said, “No. What is it?” She says, “De-Ba’athification order.” I said, “Wow.” So I read it real quick there in the hall. I said, “This is too deep.”

NARRATOR: Retired general Jay Garner was one of the few Americans who knew his way around Iraq. He’d worked there before.

Col. THOMAS M. GROSS (Ret.), Office of Humanitarian Assistance: He was very, very, very angry. And Jay’s very personable. His head was down. He was walking fast-paced all over. I could tell he was very upset about it.

Gen. JAY GARNER: I walked down, and a CIA guy, a great guy, was coming across the hallway. And I said, “Hey, Charlie, have you read the de-Ba’athification?” And he said, “Yeah, that’s why I’m here.” I said, “Well, let’s go in and talk to the ambassador.”

NARRATOR: Garner was worried that Bremer seemed not to understand how things worked in Iraq.

Gen. JAY GARNER: So we went in and we talked to Ambassador Bremer for a few minutes. And I said, “You know, this is too deep.” I said, “Let—give Charlie and I about 45 minutes to an hour. Let us digest this thing, and then let us recommend some changes to you and come back here, and we’ll get on the phone with Rumsfeld to see if we can’t soften this a bit.

THOMAS RICKS: And Bremer kind of says, “Look, you don’t understand. I’m not asking you, I’m telling you this is what I’m going to do. I’m not asking for your advice.” And they argue a bit more. And finally, Bremer says, “Look, I have my orders. This is what I’m doing.

Gen. JAY GARNER: And so I said, “Well, Charlie, what do you think?” And to the best of my memory, Charlie said, “Well, if you do this, you’re going to drive 30,000 to 50,000 Ba’athists underground by nightfall. And the number’s closer to 50,000 than it is to 30,000.”
 
We lost the war in Iraq under Bush, as the stated goal was removal of weapons that didn't exist. And, al Qaeda was given time; now the US must make amend for what we unleasehed.
 
We lost the war in Iraq under Bush, as the stated goal was removal of weapons that didn't exist. And, al Qaeda was given time; now the US must make amend for what we unleasehed.

More far left propaganda..

The October 2002, U.S. congress Iraq War Resolution cited many factors to justify the use of military force against Iraq:

Iraq's noncompliance with the conditions of the 1991 ceasefire agreement, including interference with U.N. weapons inspectors.

Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction, and programs to develop such weapons, posed a "threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region."

Iraq's "brutal repression of its civilian population."

Iraq's "capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people".

Iraq's hostility towards the United States as demonstrated by the 1993 assassination attempt on former President George H. W. Bush and firing on coalition aircraft enforcing the no-fly zones following the 1991 Gulf War.

Members of Al-Qaeda, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq.

Iraq's "continuing to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations," including anti-United States terrorist organizations.

Iraq paid bounty to families of suicide bombers.

The efforts by the Congress and the President to fight terrorists, including the September 11th, 2001 terrorists and those who aided or harbored them.

The authorization by the Constitution and the Congress for the President to fight anti-United States terrorism.

The governments in Turkey, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia feared Saddam and wanted him removed from power.

Citing the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, the resolution reiterated that it should be the policy of the United States to remove the Saddam Hussein regime and promote a democratic replacement.
 
No illegal strikes, nothing illegal about it...

This was explained on another thread using far left structure from 2003 to 2009.

So you have to steal from the far-left an explanation for why airstrikes are illegal? Why don't you tell us what makes them illegal instead of taking the easy way. Maybe because they aren't illegal?
 
Last edited:
"You know nothing, Kosh Snow."

You are nothing but a far right propaganda weirdo that make knowledgeable folks wince at your reactionary childish efforts here.
 
How democrats lose wars we have already won...

You can thank Nouri al-Maliki for the current crisis in Iraq.

Stop al-Maliki brutality against civilians

I don't get the right wing delusion.

First, we invade Iraq by blowing up thousands of Iraqi's giving the impression of violent and dangerous invaders who will destroy anything that moves. The entire world becomes scared of us and sees us as a terrible threat.

Then we disband the entire Iraqi army leaving them without jobs, healthcare or anyway to take care of their families.

Then at the end of the gun, we force a government on them they didn't ask for.

Then when they ask us to leave and we have to because we crushed their old government and replaced it, we simply couldn't stay without looking like empire builders.

Shortly after we leave, everything falls apart because the bullies and their weapons have left.

And the Republicans say that it's the Democrats fault because they had every thing under control not realizing they had nothing under control. People were simply scared of them.

The worst part about this, Republicans were warned again and again all the way back in 2003. It's nothing new. But their delusional minds protects them from reality.
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom