bremer's revelation
I wrote my very first post on this blog with the thought in mind that I had written quite an irreverent post. I thought maybe I stepped out of line to some extent when I said that the conservatives running our country are fools, and that they are proving it by underestimating our enemies. I declared that you can't trust a conservative to run a campaign against terrorism because they have absolutely no idea where to start, since they think that our enemies are using standard landlines and cellular communications, instead of something more obscure or more sophisticated. I thought maybe I was being a little tough on the people trying to save American lives, and maybe I wasn't giving credit where credit was due. Maybe they aren't so dumb, after all.
Then, I read this.
Oh. My. Non-existant God.
You've got to be kidding me. These are the people that conservatives trust with winning wars?
On one of the last nights prior to the 2004 election, I remember someone in #politics saying "elect a Democrat during war time? that's dangerous thinking." Dangerous thinking, folks.
You know what's dangerous thinking? Assuming you won't be meeting any long term resistance. That's dangerous thinking.
Assuming you won't be needing the best body armor money can buy for our troops. That's dangerous thinking.
Assuming that if you drop the corporate tax rate in Iraq to 15%, allow foreign companies to pull 100% of thier profits out of Iraq without any reinvestment, and create those same conditions for foreign banks, Iraq would explode with business, and companies would be rushing in to create a business boom*, like bees to sweet, sweet honey. You also have to go and assumed that there would be no resistance to the rebuilding, and therefore, nobody blowing up the investments that these companies are sopposed to be pouring into this nation. You did all of this forethinking with the assumption that, in one of the most dangerous regions in the world, there would somehow be no resistance.
Dangerous, dangerous thinking.
These are the fools that are running our nation, my kind reader. They've underestimated every single aspect of the war, from how much troops would be needed to how much in rebuilding funds would be needed to how much body armor would be needed. They thought that, after easily rushing American troops into Baghdad and topping the statue and regime of Saddam in no time, that this would be a cakewalk.
How much has the green zone expanded, I ask you.
How many American fast food restaraunts are lining the streets of Anbar, I ask you.
Where's that Wal-Mart that was sopposed to crush, for the assumed better, the local businesses and basically take over the economy of Iraq?
What about the web page for "New Bridge Strategies," one of the major consultant firms that was sopposed to be facilitating the rebuilding Iraq "after the U.S. led war," because the "opportunities evolving in Iraq today are of such an unprecedented nature and scope that companies seeking to work in that environment must have the very best advice and guidance available." They still say on the rebuild page, "When Iraq is ready to rebuild, we will be there." This web page hasn't been updated since 2003.
This was their "plan." This is why they didn't think to use the best body armor for our troops; they simply assumed there wouldn't be any need for it. Just plow out the bad guys and make the conditions in Iraq so favorable to business, they'll simply be falling over themselves to get a piece of the action, and the country would practically rebuild itself, and we'll be out of there in no time.*
And this all ties together into a conservative mindset of faith and assumptions. Just like how they underestimated and assumed that there would be no resistance to American occupation in Iraq, they also assumed that the terrorists are using common technology instead of something more obscure or even more sophisticated. These are seperate occurances of shortcomings from the same school of geopolitical thought.
Did they get anything about this war right? I'm waiting; I want to believe, I want to see through what conservatives call my "blindness" and understand how this is a resounding success.
It's just that reality keeps blocking the view.
*CORRECTIONS*
In the original wording of this post, I claimed that conservatives relied on their "favorable business conditions" to create the infrastructure for Iraq. This claim was incorrect. As this USAID paper circa February 2003 recognizes:
Complete reconstruction of the economic and institutional capacity of 1980 (conditions prior to the Iraq/Iran war will require years of public investment.
(My emphesis added.)
But we do know one thing about today's conservatives, and that's the unfallable faith in the private sector. It can only be assumed that eventually, all public services would be privatized. I made the wrong assumption that they would be making efforts towards this at the first swing of the bat.
Then, I read this.
WASHINGTON, Jan 6 (Reuters) - Paul Bremer, who led the U.S. civilian occupation authority in Iraq after the 2003 invasion, has admitted the United States did not anticipate the insurgency in the country, NBC Television said on Friday.
Bremer, interviewed by the network in connection with release of his book on Iraq, recounted the decision to disband the Iraqi army quickly after arriving in Baghdad, a move many experts consider a major miscalculation.
When asked who was to blame for the subsequent Iraqi rebellion, in which thousands of Iraqis and Americans have died, Bremer said "we really didn't see the insurgency coming," the network said in a news release.
Oh. My. Non-existant God.
You've got to be kidding me. These are the people that conservatives trust with winning wars?
On one of the last nights prior to the 2004 election, I remember someone in #politics saying "elect a Democrat during war time? that's dangerous thinking." Dangerous thinking, folks.
You know what's dangerous thinking? Assuming you won't be meeting any long term resistance. That's dangerous thinking.
Assuming you won't be needing the best body armor money can buy for our troops. That's dangerous thinking.
Assuming that if you drop the corporate tax rate in Iraq to 15%, allow foreign companies to pull 100% of thier profits out of Iraq without any reinvestment, and create those same conditions for foreign banks, Iraq would explode with business, and companies would be rushing in to create a business boom*, like bees to sweet, sweet honey. You also have to go and assumed that there would be no resistance to the rebuilding, and therefore, nobody blowing up the investments that these companies are sopposed to be pouring into this nation. You did all of this forethinking with the assumption that, in one of the most dangerous regions in the world, there would somehow be no resistance.
Dangerous, dangerous thinking.
These are the fools that are running our nation, my kind reader. They've underestimated every single aspect of the war, from how much troops would be needed to how much in rebuilding funds would be needed to how much body armor would be needed. They thought that, after easily rushing American troops into Baghdad and topping the statue and regime of Saddam in no time, that this would be a cakewalk.
How much has the green zone expanded, I ask you.
How many American fast food restaraunts are lining the streets of Anbar, I ask you.
Where's that Wal-Mart that was sopposed to crush, for the assumed better, the local businesses and basically take over the economy of Iraq?
What about the web page for "New Bridge Strategies," one of the major consultant firms that was sopposed to be facilitating the rebuilding Iraq "after the U.S. led war," because the "opportunities evolving in Iraq today are of such an unprecedented nature and scope that companies seeking to work in that environment must have the very best advice and guidance available." They still say on the rebuild page, "When Iraq is ready to rebuild, we will be there." This web page hasn't been updated since 2003.
This was their "plan." This is why they didn't think to use the best body armor for our troops; they simply assumed there wouldn't be any need for it. Just plow out the bad guys and make the conditions in Iraq so favorable to business, they'll simply be falling over themselves to get a piece of the action, and the country would practically rebuild itself, and we'll be out of there in no time.*
And this all ties together into a conservative mindset of faith and assumptions. Just like how they underestimated and assumed that there would be no resistance to American occupation in Iraq, they also assumed that the terrorists are using common technology instead of something more obscure or even more sophisticated. These are seperate occurances of shortcomings from the same school of geopolitical thought.
Did they get anything about this war right? I'm waiting; I want to believe, I want to see through what conservatives call my "blindness" and understand how this is a resounding success.
It's just that reality keeps blocking the view.
*CORRECTIONS*
In the original wording of this post, I claimed that conservatives relied on their "favorable business conditions" to create the infrastructure for Iraq. This claim was incorrect. As this USAID paper circa February 2003 recognizes:
Complete reconstruction of the economic and institutional capacity of 1980 (conditions prior to the Iraq/Iran war will require years of public investment.
(My emphesis added.)
But we do know one thing about today's conservatives, and that's the unfallable faith in the private sector. It can only be assumed that eventually, all public services would be privatized. I made the wrong assumption that they would be making efforts towards this at the first swing of the bat.
posted by Dave @ 11:46 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home