  |
 |
| |
|
|
|
 U.S. Postwar Iraq Strategy a Mess, Tony Blair Was ToldPosted on Mar 14, 2006According to leaked secret memos, top advisors to the British leader gave him explicit warnings three years ago that the U.S. had “No leadership, no strategy, no coordination, no structure and [was] inaccessible to ordinary Iraqis.”
The Guardian: Senior British diplomatic and military staff gave Tony Blair explicit warnings three years ago that the US was disastrously mishandling the occupation of Iraq, according to leaked memos. John Sawers, Mr Blair’s envoy in Baghdad in the aftermath of the invasion, sent a series of confidential memos to Downing Street in May and June 2003 cataloguing US failures. With unusual frankness, he described the US postwar administration, led by the retired general Jay Garner, as “an unbelievable mess” and said “Garner and his top team of 60-year-old retired generals” were “well-meaning but out of their depth”. SHARE THIS TRUTHDIG ARTICLE:
|
|
Clinton Pick Wins Conservatives’ Approval
Email
Print
Share
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Fark
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Mixx
MySpace
NewsVine
NewsTrust
Reddit
SphereIt
StumbleUpon
TwitThis
YahooBuzz
Jump to Comments
By James, March 14, 2006 at 5:22 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Jay Garner is an interesting character that pops in and out of the news every so often. His experience in Iraq is best remembered in ‘Assassin’s Gate,’ a book that came out some time last year. As noted in the Guardian piece, Garner’s role in Iraq was indeed well-meaning but entirely pointless as Rumsfeld and Co. had no plans on seeing to Garner’s success. In fact, the book strongly suggests that the Pentagon used him as a fall guy to pursue god-awful agendas that to this day have contributed to the quagmire that is Iraq. But, here’s what gets me the most: I watch Tony Blair on C-SPAN as often as I can when he is dueling members of the Common. I find him infinitely more capable and smarter than our own leader here in the good ol’ US of A. He is fast with the quick rebuttals and he knows how to shake down his opponents in debates. However, I can never get my head around how Blair would commit to something like Iraq and this “war on terror” or “spreading democracy.” Didn’t he learn a thing or two of colonial imperialism when he was in grade school? What’s in it for him in regards to this whole war on terror?
Report thisBy felicity smith, March 14, 2006 at 11:04 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
An article in the April/ “Atlantic Monthly” pretty well reveals the present conditions/problems in Iraq. If rubble can be a synonym for infrastructure, much of Iraq has a healthy infrastructure. Unemployment is rampant and growing. American troops are trained to blow up things and kill people not in constabulary duties and certainly not in “nation building,” which is impossible given the conditions existing in Iraq.
Report thisBy Hilding Lindquist, March 14, 2006 at 2:46 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
“No leadership, no strategy, no coordination, no structure and inaccessible to ordinary Iraqis.”—secret report to Blair.
“Stay the course.”—public report from Bush.
“We may have been seduced into something we might be inclined to regret. Is strategic failure a possibility? The answer has to be ‘yes’.”—again from the secret report to Blair.
One thing we know, the British knew how to run an empire ... like the words in the song, “Got to know when to hold ‘em, know when to fold ‘em. Know when to walk away, know when to run.”
“It is not knowable what a war or conflict like [the war in Iraq] would cost. You donʼt know if it is going to last two days, two weeks, or two months ... but certainly it isnʼt going to last two years.—Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, before the start of the war on March 19, 2003.
Report this