Site Search:
 
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

We were clueless about insurgency says Wolfowitz
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
On the other hand



Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue

PostPosted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 10:00 am    Post subject: We were clueless about insurgency says Wolfowitz Reply with quote

Quote:
WASHINGTON � Paul Wolfowitz, in his first public remarks on the Iraq war in years, said the American government was "pretty much clueless on counterinsurgency" in the first year of the war.

The former deputy secretary of defense said yesterday that the force sent to Iraq was adequate for fighting Saddam Hussein's military, citing the speed with which American troops toppled the regime. But Mr. Wolfowitz said no one in the Bush administration anticipated that Saddam would order his security services to wage an insurgency after their formal defeat on the battlefield.


Somthing to remember next time the Republicans claim that Democrats are weak on military issues.

http://tinyurl.com/6cewmq
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nowhere Man



Joined: 08 Feb 2004

PostPosted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 11:09 am    Post subject: ... Reply with quote

I like the page 2 bit where they're planning the invasion in December.

Now call me a a left-wing trolley dodger, but I still get the idea that those bat-shit insane douches frolicking about the White House circa 2002 had it in mind to take out that whole axis of evil, possibly even in the bat-shittiest time frame of before 2004. What douches.

They were clueless bout the insurgency because they were already half-way to Tehran and only looking back at the Iraqi cheerleaders.

Bat shit.

Douches.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kuros



Joined: 27 Apr 2004

PostPosted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 1:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ha ha. The neo-cons are amusing. They're like a bunch of college freshman trying to rule the world in one of their bull sessions. So naive.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Gopher



Joined: 04 Jun 2005

PostPosted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 1:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
...the deputy secretary of defense downplayed testimony from a retired Army chief of staff, General Eric Shinseki, who told Congress that postwar stabilization operations would require several hundred thousand troops.


This goes to the very heart of the W. Bush Administration's failure -- once it decided to invade Iraq, that is.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ya-ta Boy



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

PostPosted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 1:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I get the feeling that those boys played way too much Risk in high school--and took it seriously.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
agentX



Joined: 12 Oct 2007
Location: Jeolla province

PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 6:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ah, Wolfie...getting lonely being on the political backburner, eh?

Now he's resorting to making things up.

Other than the Baathists, there was no insurgency until a certain SOMEONE decided to disband the Iraqi military, over the protests of Gen. McCaffrey.

You're doing a heckuva job there, Wolfie! Way to win one for the home team!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
On the other hand



Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue

PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 10:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Ha ha. The neo-cons are amusing. They're like a bunch of college freshman trying to rule the world in one of their bull sessions. So naive.


Back when the neo-cons were still in their Mission Accomplished euphoria, I saw something published by some neo-con think tank where the guy was arguing that the next target for liberation should be North Korea. He thought it could really be a success, because they'd go in with backup from South Korean troops, who'd know the language and thus have an easy time pacifying the country.



Yep, an army trained on that kind of propaganda is really gonna go all soft and cuddly just because the guy pointing the gun at them is speaking Korean instead of English.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ya-ta Boy



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 1:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Yep, an army trained on that kind of propaganda is really gonna go all soft and cuddly just because the guy pointing the gun at them is speaking Korean instead of English.


It's only 98% nuts. There's about a 2% chance the Norks would go all soft and cuddly when the Chinese army started poking 'em in the butt with their bayonets.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mindmetoo



Joined: 02 Feb 2004

PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 5:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gopher wrote:
Quote:
...the deputy secretary of defense downplayed testimony from a retired Army chief of staff, General Eric Shinseki, who told Congress that postwar stabilization operations would require several hundred thousand troops.


This goes to the very heart of the W. Bush Administration's failure -- once it decided to invade Iraq, that is.


Hey I thought you used to claim criticizing Bush was unpatriotic or unAmerican?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mindmetoo



Joined: 02 Feb 2004

PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 5:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

agentX wrote:
Ah, Wolfie...getting lonely being on the political backburner, eh?

Now he's resorting to making things up.

Other than the Baathists, there was no insurgency until a certain SOMEONE decided to disband the Iraqi military, over the protests of Gen. McCaffrey.

You're doing a heckuva job there, Wolfie! Way to win one for the home team!


But Saddam's son was waging such a war during the war. If you'll recall America took the most casualties from irregular forces, the Fedayeen.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mnhnhyouh



Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Location: The Middle Kingdom

PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 5:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

IIRC, they had boxes of U.S. flags for the locals to wave.

I still wonder what they were thinking. I think these guys are smart, so I dont understand.

So often colonial powers have put a minority in power, the minority then needs to stamp hard on the majority and needs the help of the colonizing power to help them. This makes the minority beholding to the colonizing power, and makes them do all the hard work. (AKA How To Run A Colony 101).

So in Iraq the Sunni muslims held most of the power positions in a Shiite majority country. So in comes the U.S. to instal Democracy 2.0 and expects anything other than a Shiite government, making them the same as their neighbors Iran?

What gives?

Maybe the hatred between Iraq and Iran is so deep because of their past that they wont get together? Bet that isnt true.

So why?

They didnt think this through? Maybe.

h
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gopher



Joined: 04 Jun 2005

PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 6:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

W. Bush and co. are not in fact stupid and they did put thought into this war. It was their presuppositions that tainted and undermined their effort. America's high-tech-based military superiority will prevail against any foe, in any environment, at any time or place, for one. (I dislike the analogy that some might immediately see, but I also recognize that we have seen this presupposition and can-do attitude before in American foreign relations history.)

mindmetoo wrote:
Gopher wrote:
Quote:
...the deputy secretary of defense downplayed testimony from a retired Army chief of staff, General Eric Shinseki, who told Congress that postwar stabilization operations would require several hundred thousand troops.
This goes to the very heart of the W. Bush Administration's failure -- once it decided to invade Iraq, that is.
Hey I thought you used to claim criticizing Bush was unpatriotic or unAmerican?


Never. I have criticized W. Bush from day one. I never voted for him; neither have I ever supported the Iraqi War. In any case, this strongly suggests that you have missed the nuances of my position on W. Bush, American affairs, and antiAmerican tropes and discourses.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
agentX



Joined: 12 Oct 2007
Location: Jeolla province

PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 6:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Fedayeen were Baathists and so were his son. They were the ones fighting the Americans before the true insurgency began after the Iraqi army was disbanded.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fedayeen_Saddam#Iraqi_insurgency
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
catman



Joined: 18 Jul 2004

PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 6:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I also remember a report about Evangelicals preparing to travel to the liberated country in order to proselytize to the heathen masses.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Adventurer



Joined: 28 Jan 2006

PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 8:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kuros wrote:
Ha ha. The neo-cons are amusing. They're like a bunch of college freshman trying to rule the world in one of their bull sessions. So naive.


I don't accept what Wolfowitz has to say, because many experts warned that things could go very wrong in Iraq. I mean I am not an intelligence officer, and I warned people I knew that things could go majorly wrong, and one would have to plan for the possibility of a rebellion or whatever.

There were people out there who warned that things could go wrong, and the conservative thing to have done was to have an adequate military force. They allowed the collapse of the Soviet Union and the easy liberation of Kuwait to cloud their judgement. I am no expert, but what I predicted in Iraq did happen. They could have consulted with experts, military or non-military otherwise. They are guilty of incompetence.
You have to be able to foresee the possibility that a country you are going to occupy may have rebels. It happens in most situations. It is simply mind-boggling incompetence. I can understand the average American maybe saying that since they can't consult policy experts who know military history, the region etc.... This is just crap.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International