After all we've seen, some people still don't get it

[billyskank]

People who are supposed to know better.

Quote:

It was the Bush administration's anger and despair at its inability to capture Osama bin Laden that fueled the patent irrationality of the move against Saddam Hussein. The attack on Iraq three years ago was, at bottom, a blind act of rage at the way Al Qaeda and its leaders had eluded us in Afghanistan; a blindness that showed itself at once in the inadequacy of US war planning.

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0417-23.htm

The neoconservative plans always involved invading Iraq and removing Saddam. That was top of their list. After 911, Bush and Rumsfeld wanted to invade Iraq immediately, but were persuaded to attack Afghanistan instead.

Anger and despair at their inability to capture Osama Bin Laden? They never tried to capture him. Why would they? The War Against Terror is their cover. If they captured Bin Laden, if they neutralised Al-Qaeda then support for their wars would wane. People would think, 'mission accomplished.'

The inadequacy of war planning was down simply to incompetence on the part of Rumsfeld et al. Not rage, or despair.

We should not give Bush and his administration credit for things they never tried to do.

[In_The_Wind]

1. I can see your point!

:kick:

[Old and In the Way]

2. I'm not sure that the inadequacy was unplanned.

As long as Iraq is destabilized, we'll stay. If we had gone in force, the place would have been a lot more secure. A government might have taken hold and then we'd have no justification to stay once they told us to leave. Their situation gives us the thin veneer of trying to avert a civil war.....I see no end in site to this current mess. And that's what the neo-cons want, at least until the bases and embassey is built.

[billyskank]

3. Maybe

I think though that that elevates them to the level of "evil super-genius." While they may well be that malevolent, I do not believe they are actually that smart.

After all, they have a lot of help, from the media and the so-called opposition party, without which they would never have been able to carry out their plans.

[Old and In the Way]

4. I vacillate between pure genius and penultimate stupidity.

But the PNAC plan has been to remake the ME into America's image. Given the way they've handled domesttic policy, they may be lowering ours to meet them in the middle. :-(

[CJCRANE]

5. I agree.

The military prefers the "Powell Doctrine" as used in Gulf War I: go in, do the job with overwhelming force, then get out, job done.

The decisions made not to use more troops, not to secure the borders etc were political decisions. The military wouldn't deliberately leave their troops in a vulnerable position if they could avoid it.

[Arkansas Granny]

6. If you haven't already visited the PNAC site, it provides some

insight into the current policy in the Middle East. Check out this article from October, 2001, from the weekly standard which is featured at their website (requires Adobe):

http://www.newamericancentury.org/Schmitt-102901.pdf

I believe that PNAC is running the show and Bush is nothing but their cheerleader.

[Ava]

7. hmmmm

:kick:

[XemaSab]

8. .

:tinfoilhat: