Pentagon institute calls war a major debacle

[Truthmatters]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20080418/wl_mcclatchy/2913186_1


Damed liberals.

 

[Truthmatters]

WASHINGTON — The war in Iraq has become "a major debacle" and the outcome "is in doubt" despite improvements in security from the buildup in U.S. forces, according to a highly critical study published Thursday by the Pentagon's premier military educational institute.



The report released by the National Defense University raises fresh doubts about President Bush 's projections of a U.S. victory in Iraq just a week after Bush announced that he was suspending U.S. troop reductions.

 

[KungFusion]

I have to wonder what are the white house's criteria for declaring "victory" in Iraq at this point? More half-hearted declarations of "improvement" from their puppet Petreaus?

The fact that it took a year and 30,000 troops just to partially secure one section of one city in a nation that we've been officially occupying for all of 6 years now is proof enough to the rest of the world that we've lost - so when the are we going to admit it to ourselves and get the hell out? Another 4,000 American deaths from now?

Nothing will decay a person or a nation more thoroughly than being hung up on a lost cause. Russia's watching with a grin as we chase our tails in the middle east, trying our damndest to re-enact the USSR's Afghanistan failure of the 80's. And who can blame them for being amused? - look where it got the Soviets!

 

[Truthmatters]

And China and Europe and anyone else who has power gains to make with our dropping down the list.

They have already seen our dollar shrink in a huge way.

 

[doeton]

I have to wonder what are the white house's criteria for declaring "victory" in Iraq at this point?

imeo it's having GW complete his term with people still thinking the war is winnable...and then his replacement will end up looking like a loser in having to clean the mess up.l.

 

[Truthmatters]

That is the plan.

Let the democrats take the guff for the mess.

Republicans break it and make the dems fix it and then blame them for the cost of fixing it.

 

[manifold]

 

[JimH52]

What a frigin idiot...

 

[doeton]

 

[Annie]

http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/2008/04/pentagon-study-current-events/

...

The Miami Herald piece on a NDU "occasional paper" (Choosing War: The Decision to Invade Iraq and Its Aftermath), quoted alternately as a Pentagon or NDU study, raised some flags here at SWJ. So we asked the author, Joseph Collins, to provide some context. His reply:

The Miami Herald story ("Pentagon Study: War is a 'Debacle' ") distorts the nature of and intent of my personal research project. It was not an NDU study, nor was it a Pentagon study. Indeed, the implication of the Herald story was that this study was mostly about current events. Such is not the case. It was mainly about the period 2002-04. The story also hypes a number of paragraphs, many of which are quoted out of context. The study does not "lay much of the blame" on Secretary Rumsfeld for problems in the conduct of the war, nor does it say that he "bypassed the Joint Chiefs of Staff." It does not single out "Condoleeza Rice and Stephen Hadley" for criticism.

Here is a fair summary of my personal research, which formally is NDU INSS Occasional Paper 5, "Choosing War: The Decision to Invade Iraq and Its Aftermath."​

This study examines how the United States chose to go to war in Iraq, how its decision-making process functioned, and what can be done to improve that process. The central finding of this study is that U.S. efforts in Iraq were hobbled by a set of faulty assumptions, a flawed planning effort, and a continuing inability to create security conditions in Iraq that could have fostered meaningful advances in stabilization, reconstruction, and governance. With the best of intentions, the United States toppled a vile, dangerous regime but has been unable to replace it with a stable entity. Even allowing for progress under the Surge, the study insists that mistakes in the Iraq operation cry out in the mid- to long-term for improvements in the U.S. decision-making and policy execution systems.

The study recommends the development of a national planning charter, improving the qualifications of national security planners, streamlining policy execution in the field, improving military education, strengthening the Department of State and USAID, and reviewing the tangled legal authorities for complex contingencies. The study ends with a plea to improve alliance relations and to exercise caution in deciding to go to war.​

SWJ Editors Note: Unfortunately this is not the first instance - nor will it be the last – of highly selective use of source quotes and excerpts as well as distortion of context by members of the “mainstream media” in reporting on recent events and trends in Iraq…

 

[RetiredGySgt]

http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/2008/04/pentagon-study-current-events/

Ohh no, tell me you did not just rain on the pity parade?

 

[Gunny]

I have to wonder what are the white house's criteria for declaring "victory" in Iraq at this point? More half-hearted declarations of "improvement" from their puppet Petreaus?

The fact that it took a year and 30,000 troops just to partially secure one section of one city in a nation that we've been officially occupying for all of 6 years now is proof enough to the rest of the world that we've lost - so when the are we going to admit it to ourselves and get the hell out? Another 4,000 American deaths from now?

Nothing will decay a person or a nation more thoroughly than being hung up on a lost cause. Russia's watching with a grin as we chase our tails in the middle east, trying our damndest to re-enact the USSR's Afghanistan failure of the 80's. And who can blame them for being amused? - look where it got the Soviets!

Your opinion is not very educated. One, this is not the Pentagon's "war." It's the administration's. The Pentagon does not define "win or lose." The administration does. The Pentagon has just been stuck trying to make it work with what they have.

Petraeus is the commander in Iraq. Calling him a puppet is a misnomer. He has a professional assessment of the situation that happens to be what the CinC wants to hear. The CinC in turn, has grossly violated military protocol by ignoring/snubbing those commanders at each level between himself and the field commander. The JCS and USSOUTHCOM are being completely disregarded.

However, if I am trying to accomplish a mission and I've got one guy that says "this is how I can do it," and a bunch of fussy old hens sucking on persimmons about everything, I'm going with the former. At least HE is trying to accomplish something for the positive.

No kudos for the Russians. They went into Afghanistan right after we got out of Vietnam and repeated the same mistake they had criticized us for. There is no basis for assuming a position of superiority for them.

Must be hard for them not to help which would be payback in a sense for them just because they feel obligated to assume the opposite position of whatever position we do.

Nothing will decay a Nation and or its morale faster than continual negativity based on nothing really, except perhaps a hope for defeat for partisan reasons.

Well yeah ... one other thing is worse ... quitting a job before its finished because those who cannot perservere would rather be losers than do what it takes to win. That would make every sacrifice to date meaningless. THAT would work.

 

[Gunny]

That is the plan.

Let the democrats take the guff for the mess.

Republicans break it and make the dems fix it and then blame them for the cost of fixing it.

You mean like the Republicans "broke" Vietnam and the Democrats fixed it?

Borrom line: if, by some means, Democrats pull the troops out of Iraq and Iraq collapses, it WILL be the Democrats' fault.

But you get ahead of yourself. One, you assume a Democrat will win the Presidency which is not a given; and two, you assume a Democrat Presidetn will be able to pull the troops out of Iraq.

Odds are good what we will actually hear, should a Democrat win, right after than win, is: "After carfefully studying the situation and listening to all the the experts, we can't just pull out." You "toss-in-the-toweler's" will be pissed, but it'll be too late. You'll already have put that person in office for 4 years on the blind belief of a promise that is you KNOW it is not feasible to keep.

Kinda makes you a "genius," doens't it?

 

[rayboyusmc]

However, if I am trying to accomplish a mission and I've got one guy that says "this is how I can do it," and a bunch of fussy old hens sucking on persimmons about everything, I'm going with the former. At least HE is trying to accomplish something for the positive.

Poor analogy. Shinseki, Abizaid, Zinni and others were not "fussy old hens". That is crap, Gunny. Also going only with those who agree with you is dangerous and stupid if you cannot prove them wrong and your view right.


Nothing will decay a Nation and or its morale faster than continual negativity based on nothing really, except perhaps a hope for defeat for partisan reasons.

And nothing can rot the moral values of a country faster than blindly staying with a war that should never have been started. Please point out anyone here who hopes for a defeat for partisan reasons. That is the lowests of the so called patriotic bullshit comments.

Well yeah ... one other thing is worse ... quitting a job before its finished because those who cannot perservere would rather be losers than do what it takes to win. That would make every sacrifice to date meaningless. THAT would work.

And how long do you stay on a job that was fucked up from the beginning. How many more have to die before the sacrifices are meaningful? How many more will die for a mistake? Hell, this administration can't even define what the hell victory is. Making a mistake is one thing, enshrining its perpetuity in patriotism is total bullshit and demagoguery.

..........

 

[RetiredGySgt]

..........

What ignorant pap. Sure thing lets let millions of Iraqis die cause a few Americans may die stabalizing their country, fuck them right? I mean they are not important at all.

 

[jillian]

What ignorant pap. Sure thing lets let millions of Iraqis die cause a few Americans may die stabalizing their country, fuck them right? I mean they are not important at all.

Were you concerned about Iraqis dying when we deposed the leader of a sovereign nation, destabilized their country, and then protected the oil instead of the infrastructure and then occupied their home?

Didn't think so.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Were you concerned about Iraqis dying when we deposed the leader of a sovereign nation, destabilized their country, and then protected the oil instead of the infrastructure and then occupied their home?

Didn't think so.

More ignorance from the left, who would have thunk it.

 

[jillian]

More ignorance from the left, who would have thunk it.

Because every word I wrote didn't happen, right?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Because every word I wrote didn't happen, right?

Sure did not. We did not rush to defend oil production at the expense of civilians. Nor did we plan to destabilize the region. But hey now that we are working to solve the problems we should just cut and run. To hell with a bunch of Arabs, right?