Rumsfeld: Democracy in Iraq was 'unrealistic'

[88Comrade2000]

We never should've gone there. Cheney, Rumsfield, Wolfowitz, Columist Bill Kristol should all be convicted of treason. They were pushing for war with Iraq every since Papa Bush ended the first war.

 

Saddam was contained and could be managed. Removing him, left a vacuum. It allowed Iran to go stronger and sowed the seeds of what eventually become ISIS.  Actually, who knows if the so called Arab Spring would've happened.

 

Cheney and his ilk were itching to go to war with Iraq. Remember, Cheney's response after 9/11; was it Saddam. He was practically foaming at the mouth hoping it was Saddam.

 

 

I would just let the sides there kill each other off.  I figure at some point, a nuke will be used there to wipe them all out. Sadly, the reason for nuking them will be because a nuke has gone off in a Western city.

[@DCGoldPants]

[Chew]

Shoulda coulda woulda.

Bottom line is those people need help. We're responsible for the situation, as is most of the world.

And we continue to sit on our hands and do nothing.

The bigger problem is that if we were to go and stomp out ISIS, another group would take over. Square one.

I don't know the answer, but someone somewhere who is smart on these things must know what to do.

Failure to act is supporting the current status quo. We suck right now.

Church, Goon. Preach brother.

[Burgold]

The problem is, there are tons of people in trouble. How do we divide our resources and ability to help. Do we take on Boko Haram? All instances of mass starvation or genocide? Do we go back to Iraq? How about the homeless vet problem here in the US? Human trafficking?

 

ISIS is a real and pressing danger. I think it should be tackled. How is tougher because as we saw with G W Bush's attempt simply going in with guns, missiles, and smart bombs followed by years of policing and attempts to set up infrastructure and government only led to a great evil breaking through.

 

Acting feels necessary. Acting wisely is tough.

[Larry]

ISIS is a real and pressing danger. I think it should be tackled. How is tougher because as we saw with G W Bush's attempt simply going in with guns, missiles, and smart bombs followed by years of policing and attempts to set up infrastructure and government only led to a great evil breaking through.

Granted, I'm sure I'm not the most informed person in the world, on this issue. But I actually think Obama is doing things the correct way. 

 

Least, as I understand it, his response is to send over a whole lot of Special Forces, to train Iraqi forces on how to fight ISIL. 

 

This is the mission that the Green Berets were created to perform.  And my gut says this is also the only solution that actually might be a long-term solution. 

 

----------

 

(I also have a feeling that the way he handled Arab Spring was probably the right method, too.  The "Obama doctrine", so to speak.was that if the people of a country wanted to overthrow their dictator, then the US would provide enough high tech things to do things like prevent the dictator's air force from carpet bombing civilians.  But the civilians will actually have to take the streets, themselves.) 

 

(It seems to have worked.  At least kinda.  In every place except Syria, where the Arabs wouldn't allow us to do it, and insisted that they had to do it, themselves.) 

 

It's a method that doesn't provide the instant "Mission accomplished" moment.  But I suspect that it's the right one, for long term. 

[The 12th Commandment]

It's a method that doesn't provide the instant "Mission accomplished" moment.  But I suspect that it's the right one, for long term. 

I think that's the key, nothing we could ever do short of full occupation would make it better immediately.  Nothing.  Well then we should try to help steer things in the direction we want using soft power (I think that's what they call it).  Intelligence for the side we like, money and weapons maybe and try to hamstring the side we don't like by limited military means, unlimited economic means and whatever else we can, when we can.  I think this is pretty much what the President is doing and I approve overall.  

[Burgold]

I'm not opposed to that, Larry. I also think that Obama's approach isn't that bad, but it's a pretty safe one and in the short run doesn't seem to be very effective. There is the urge to think "Well, if we broke it we ought to buy it" when it comes to Iraq. That's dangerous too.

 

I suspect the answer, if there is an answer, is a multi-generational one. It has to start with changing the mindset and the nature of what is a reasonable way to respond. In the US, most of us wouldn't dream of responding to being "wronged" the way these ISIS people have. Part of that is because we have it pretty darn good here. Par of it is because the system mostly works. Part of it is because the infrastructure we've developed supports heterogeneous ideas and ideals and so we can (mostly) get along.

[Destino]

So we're cool saying those savages can't handle freedom and democracy now? That's essentially what this is.

[Riggo-toni]

Training the Iraqi army, and worse, equipping them to fight ISIL is a fool's errand borne of idealistic denial. The Iraqi army has been purged of Sunnis to prevent a possible coup d'etat. It will never fight to protect Sunni or Kurd territory against anyone. When bullets fly, soldiers fight to protect their brothers in arms much more than country. No matter how many trainers we send over there, they will always flee at the first whiff of conflict and retreat back to defensive positions around Baghdad.

The best solution was always to allow the country to break up and arm our only true allies, the Kurds, to the teeth. Instead we were so worried about diplomatic sensibilities that we left them in the lurch, and inadvertently provided their worst nightmare, ISIL, with a massive cache of US weapons courtesy of the fleeing Iraqi army.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Everyday George Herbert Walker Bush looks better and better.

 

Smart enough to eject Saddam from Kuwait with an international coalition carefully built.

 

Smart enough not to move into Iraq and occupy it.

 

Smart enough to set up an arrangement that kept Saddam contained, and Iran in a corner. 

[The 12th Commandment]

So we're cool saying those savages can't handle freedom and democracy now? That's essentially what this is.

Kind of a cynical way to put it.  I would say they are on an organic path to it now and not a forced march.

[@DCGoldPants]

Everyday George Herbert Walker Bush looks better and better.

 

Smart enough to eject Saddam from Kuwait with an international coalition carefully built.

 

Smart enough not to move into Iraq and occupy it.

 

Smart enough to set up an arrangement that kept Saddam contained, and Iran in a corner. 

 

The guy who followed him seem to get it also about not invading.

[SkinsHokieFan]

The guy who followed him seem to get it also about not invading.

 

The guy who followed was smart enough not to screw it all up. A few days of missile strikes at Baghdad every 2 years and a few dozen dead was all that was needed

[Larry]

So we're cool saying those savages can't handle freedom and democracy now?

 

Where you get this "we", Kimo Sabe?

[twa]

Training the Iraqi army, and worse, equipping them to fight ISIL is a fool's errand borne of idealistic denial. The Iraqi army has been purged of Sunnis to prevent a possible coup d'etat. It will never fight to protect Sunni or Kurd territory against anyone. When bullets fly, soldiers fight to protect their brothers in arms much more than country. No matter how many trainers we send over there, they will always flee at the first whiff of conflict and retreat back to defensive positions around Baghdad.

The best solution was always to allow the country to break up and arm our only true allies, the Kurds, to the teeth. Instead we were so worried about diplomatic sensibilities that we left them in the lurch, and inadvertently provided their worst nightmare, ISIL, with a massive cache of US weapons courtesy of the fleeing Iraqi army.

 

they are coming for Baghdad , maybe the Shia militias will do more than talk and murder.

[88Comrade2000]

Everyday George Herbert Walker Bush looks better and better.

 

Smart enough to eject Saddam from Kuwait with an international coalition carefully built.

 

Smart enough not to move into Iraq and occupy it.

 

Smart enough to set up an arrangement that kept Saddam contained, and Iran in a corner. 

He does but frankly, we shouldn't have gone to Iraq then either.  An oilman worrying about access to oil was all that war was about.

 

We should've just armed Saudi Arabia and them them fight Iraq.

[TheGoodBits]

He does but frankly, we shouldn't have gone to Iraq then either. An oilman worrying about access to oil was all that war was about.

We should've just armed Saudi Arabia and them them fight Iraq.

Disagree there. That sent a clear message to the world that invading neighboring countries for the hell of it would be met with swift international response and a boot in the arse. Desert Shield/Storm was a massive success. Followed up with the effective Kosovo strategy and the U.S./UN/NATO approach was looking pretty damn good prior to 2003. Can't say that now though.... 14 years of never ending global war has taxed our ability to be that leader in these situations.

[@DCGoldPants]

back to Rummy.

 

Are we in agreement that he's full of **** here?

 

He's the guy who had no answer when confronted in Iraq by America soldiers about the lack of armor for themselves or vehicles. Why should anybody listen to him now? What's next? Inviting John Bolton to the next strategy meeting? Some of these guys in the Cheney mold have been so extreme wrong even if they still can't see it. 

[mcsluggo]

He does but frankly, we shouldn't have gone to Iraq then either.  An oilman worrying about access to oil was all that war was about.

 

We should've just armed Saudi Arabia and them them fight Iraq.

 

i think you sound insane here.

[Destino]

Where you get this "we", Kimo Sabe?

Everyone agreeing that Iraq can't handle democracy because they don't like how it's turned out. I find that sentiment somewhat puzzling because democracy has never meant free from corruption, liberal, just, or even particularly well run.

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

Also, some of us were saying this in 2004....some of us.

Even 2002 for some

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=99591469

[NoCalMike]

Without re-hashing the entire debate about the war itself, is it safe to say that Rumsfield is attempting to do some MMQB-ing here? I can't think of a time he ever seemed not in favor of everything, every step of the way back then at the time.

[mjah]

Incredible how in 2002 we had the world behind us 100% on the anti-terror effort and in a matter of 2 years pissed it all away. Along with trillions of dollars, thousands of American lives, tens/hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives, regional stability, and possibly the longterm prosperity of our nation.

The extent of the ripple effect from this unilateral decision is yet to be determined and will play out over decades. Maybe generations.

 

Amen.  I have been saying this for years.  

 

W and friends had 200 years of precedent establishing what effective wartime Presidents can do to defend and improve our nation, and ignored it all in favor of unnecessary, elective, hopelessly ruinous doctrinal nonsense .  The results have been a total disaster, though not surprisingly given that decision-making process.  

 

We had so much goodwill working in our favor.  Yet another opportunity to lead ourselves and other nations into a new era while outwardly being true to our claimed principles, with very real attendant benefits to our nation.  And it all got flushed down the toilet for reasons that were comparatively worthless, not to mention morally and ethically bankrupt.  All on the international stage.  To the world, that was who we were.  (...Are?)

 

I sometimes hear the response "Who cares about leading others?  Why do we need any of those people?"  A question which is not only hopelessly ignorant, but also was the philosophy the W administration carried into Iraq to disastrous effect.

[s0crates]

As usual, violence begets violence. The whole situation in the Middle East is just sad.

[ExoDus84]

Democracy works when you have a body politic that is, broadly speaking, uniform in their religious backgrounds and culture. Iraq is a melting pot of who knows how many variations of Islam, all of whom are trying to kill one another. Those oppressed under Sadaam wanted revenge and power. Those who had power under Sadaam wanted to keep it. Sunni and Shiites hate each other, so in an environment where there's a complete breakdown in policing and accountability, a vicious civil war was the likely outcome.

 

I think it's pretty obvious a coalition democratic government wasn't going to work. Obvious to anybody with half a brain, that is. That excludes the previous Bush administration.

 

It's our fault the country is such a mess, but at this point, there is little we can do except supply the government, and train them, to handle this mess.