When the history of the occupation of Iraq is written, there will be many factors to point to when explaining the post-conquest descent into chaos and disorder, from the melting away of Saddam's army to the Pentagon's failure to make adequate plans for the occupation. But historians will also consider the lack of experience and abundant political connections of the hundreds of American bureaucrats sent to Baghdad to run Iraq through the Coalition Provisional Authority. ... In their place, the architects of the war chose card-carrying Republicans -- operatives, flacks, policy-wonks and lobbyists -- for almost every key assignment in the country. Some marquee examples include U.S. civil administrator Paul Bremer's senior advisor and liaison to Capitol Hill, Tom Korologos, one of the most powerful GOP lobbyists on Capitol Hill. Then there's the man in charge of privatizing Iraq's 200-odd state owned companies, Tom Foley, a venture capitalist and high-flying GOP fundraiser. Foley was one of the Bob Dole's top-ten career donors, Connecticut finance chair for Bush 2000 and a classmate of the president's from Harvard Business School. ... CPA officials say that the older GOP functionaries do a reasonable job keeping their partisanship publicly under wraps. But the younger Republicans in Iraq spend much of their time plotting against the Democrats. "Everything is seen in the context of the election, and how they will screw the Democrats," said one CPA official. "It was really pretty shocking to hear them talk." "They are all on the campaign trail," said another official. "They see this as a stepping stone to a better job in the next Bush administration."
And on a personal note, I found out today that my best friend, a lieutenant in the Army Reserve, has been mobilized. He has a wife and two small children to leave behind. When he signed up a few years ago, he said he wanted to serve his country. I have tried to convince him that there's no dishonor in disobeying orders and fleeing an unjust war waged by an unelected commander-in-chief. To his credit, while he has been as critical of this war as I have, he still says he has to serve out his commitment. (He's a lifelong Democrat, by the way.) I wish he would reconsider, consider a flight to a neutral country, but I know he won't. He has a sense of honor and duty that should shame his "commander in chief":http://www.warstories.cc/person/?personId=1, who went AWOL in Vietnam after he got airlifted by his father's influence into a cushy Texas Air National Guard spot. I admire my friend a lot for his sense of patriotism and duty, even though he knows he will be missing 18 months of his daughters' lives, even though he believes Iraq is a colossal screw-up and a mistake of mammoth proportions. He would never say a disrespectful thing about George Bush while mobilized, but I can: To hell with Bush and to hell with this war. Anyway, this has made it all the more imperative that I go back and, as I joke with him, make sure nothing happens to him.
It’s funny (not amusing-funny, but pathetic-funny) to hear a neo-con describing him/herself to one they perceive as a friend: Dubya admitted a weakness in being unable to read large books or foreign policy, “things like that”. So that makes him fit to lead a nation? And now Ms. Millions admits she can’t plan a tuna salad - just great. We had noticed that weakness, incidentally, before she brought it up.
Seems like Americans as a whole need to admit a weakness for just letting “stuff happen” and figure out how to avoid it happening in the future.
I’m so sorry to hear about your best friend, Chris. It sucks, and I’m sure we will all be keeping a good thought for his safety, along with your own when you get B2I.
Thanks, Jan.
It’s unbelievable that she has no scruples to declare herself a “non-planing, superficial, come-what-might-come woman” in the public.
Lay your safty in her hands … - uuaaaahh (shocking thought)!
I’m sorry for your friend - I wish him all the best luck to return healthy to his family. Same luck for you.
YOU NEED TO ADD A DAMN UNSUBSCRIBE TO YOUR EMAILS & SITE…
Boy do I regret ever giving you money. That was back before you made every post into a trip to the gutter, full of partisanism and grade-school insults.
If you want to be taken seriously, take yourself seriously. Whatever you may think of Condi Rice, Bill Clinton, George Bush, or whoever, it’s helpful to reflect that their impact on the world and their accomplishments make your own appear vanishingly small. They didn’t get to where they are by accident, and the competition is fierce. Whenever I hear people who have achieved great power sneered at by the powerless, I wonder who they think they are fooling.
******BREAKING NEWS******BREAKING NEWS******BREAKING NEWS******BREAKING NEWS******BREAKING NEWS******BREAKING NEWS******BREAKING NEWS******BREAKING NEWS******BREAKING NEWS******BREAKING NEWS******
CHIRAC AGREED TO SEND 200.000 FRENCH TROOPS TO BAIL OUT YOUESSAN “ARMY” HIT BY MASSIVE DESERTIONS
Our special correspondent in Paris reports.
French officials are alarmed by the catastrophic news coming from Iraq: Unitedstatish “soldiers” are escaping from Iraq under the guise of Kurdish citizens, wearing the famous Iraqi and Arab al-dashdasha (loose headdress) which has become much sought-after recently, Iraqis told FoxNews. His Excellency Jean-David Levitte, France’s ambassador to the youess, was lately ordered to return to France immediately by the President of the French Republic, Jacques Chirac. Mr Levitte unconvincingly denied leaking that President Chirac was “infuriated” that the French ”had to bail the youess out for a third time in less than 250 years” —-referring to the independence granted by the French Army to the British insurgents and to the Louisiana purchase wanted by Paris to help nascent youessan agriculture and stop starvation. According to press leaks, Mr Chirac nonetheless admitted that he wouldn’t ”wait until all those cheeseburger-eatin’ desertin’ she-boons are hiding somewhere in Turkey” to lend a helping hand to the desperate unitedstatish officials. An aid to Mrs Michèle Alliot-Marie, Minister of Defence, aired that President Chirac was prepared to send a 200.000-strong expeditionary force to replace deserting youessans. The aid told Mrs Alliot-Marie did nothing to hide her ”annoyance” at youessan ”staggering incompetence ” and ”utter inaptitude ”. She allegedly even mentioned that ”the French are successful in Congo-Zaïre the size of which is four times bigger than that of France while the youessey is simply incapable of taking charge of Iraq which is 22 times smaller. This is starting to get ridiculous !”.
Authorised sources from Vichyngton D.C. disclosed that Obersturmführer John Ashcroft recently arranged a secret trip to the French capital for Donald Rumsfeld. French Authorities have issued a forged Pakistani passport under the fake name of “Donallahda Ben Rimsfild” to camouflage Rumsfeld’s top-secret flight to Paris. Besides those humiliating measures, Mrs Ben Rimsfild had to put a burka on before she was allowed on board in an Air France’s Airbus for Paris. ”The burka was needed to guarantee anonymity to Mr Rumsfeld”, said Jean-Cyril Spinetta, Air France’s CEO, “It was intended as neither a persecutory manœuvre nor a vicious intrigue. It was a mere self-explaining precautionary step”. At her arrival to Charles-de-Gaulle airport, Mrs Ben Rimsfild was swiftly pushed in a black-glassed, bullet-proof luxury Renault that rushed to the Quai d’Orsay —-the office of Mr Dominique de Villepin, Minister of Foreign Affairs. After a three-hour fifty-minute wait in the sumptuously furnished anteroom to de Villepin’s austere cabinet, Mrs Ben Rimsfild was eventually asked in. Profoundly embarrassed by Mrs Ben Rimsfild’s utter impropriety, Mr de Villepin urged the youessan to unveil. Which (s)he did —-suddenly bursting into tears and yelling hysterically: ”You MUST help us out ! You MUST bail us out ! I can’t take it anymore…”. Disconcerted by such an obvious lack of sang-froid, de Villepin spouted comforting words to Mrs Ben Rimsfild that he would see to it that President Chirac makes a telephone call to Bush, and then he saw the whining nuisance off at his cabinet’s mahogany doors.
Unfortunately French concerns about unitedstatish impotence are not limited to diplomatic and military issues. Said Francis Mer, France’s Minister of Economy and Finance: ”The French are happy to help the youessey overcome those very sad times” —-a polite allusion to the disastrous $ 31.250.000.000.000 deficit caused by unitedstatish households, companies and federal government. Mr Mer explained that the “fine” the Californian Attorney General “demanded” from the Crédit Lyonnais —-a top-ranking French-owned bank—- and from French Authorities ”was actually a secret bilateral agreement”. To the great despair of demoralised youess financial “markets”, the Crédit Lyonnais acquired Executive Life (an ailing unitedstatish insurance company) a few years ago. Upon a formal request by Mrs Roselyne Bachelot, Minister of Environment and Ecology, Mr Mer agreed to inject fresh money ($ 475.000.000) into the youess “economy” ”to help California hire more fire-fighters so that new blazes could be extinguished more rapidly”. Mr Mer also insisted that the extra subsidy ”should be allocated to the 60.000.000 youessans who still don’t enjoy Social Security, a fundamental right of unitedstatish citizens”. Asked whether the $-475.000.000 subsidy was truly considered a “fine” by the French government, Mr Mer simply left without answering —-a clumsy attempt to appear diplomatic. Mrs Bachelot —-an inveterate leaker—- later floated that the subsidy was in reality categorised as “foreign emergency aid” according to the French public budget system, although ”we are eager to show utmost consideration towards our unlucky, pitiful unitedstatish friends”.
I too, have a similar story. My friend, a 44 year old mechanic with his own business, two children and wife, was called to serve his country in Baghdad. The government gave him a whopping two weeks to get his affairs in order, and he will be stationed there for 1.5 years. He is also a liberal, and against this war, and he also will do his patriotic duty (even though everybody knows that liberals are bleeding heart whimps). I feel exactly the way you do about it.
Gerald
SLS— It’s a duty of every citizen in a democracy to criticize “people who have achieved great power.” And it’s a duty of journalists to hold rulers’ feet to the fire. I have never been quiet about my opinions. I’m sorry you regret supporting the effort.
Unsigned guy who wants to unsubscribe— if you email me at chris@back-to-iraq.com, with your email that you signed up as, I’ll remove you, no problem.
SLS, you should do some research on Smedley Butler and give a rethink to your attitude concerning power.
As Chris notes, it is the right, nay, the duty, of every US citizen to speak to our officials, elected or not, to praise or to criticize.
It is also your right to criticize fellow citizens like Chris (or me, and I left a link). You are correct in your note concerning the impact of Condi Rice, Bill Clinton and George Bush. As I see it, the Bush administration took a divided nation to war in the Middle East in the face of a divided world, using faith-based (or perhaps I should say Feith-based) intelligence. The impact of that action will have an impact on the nation, on the Middle East, and on people like Chris’ friend and Gerald’s friend, for many years to come.
May God prevent any American president from grabbing such “great power” as this one has. And may God help George Bush find someone whose skills include “long-term planning” in his/her resume to manage our Iraq policy.
i do not agree w/ what the women are told to do in islam and i think we should fight for equal rights
Poor SLS. Acting as if Bush, Rice, et al. are above a little criticism.
I am sure you withheld all criticism of Clinton for the 8 years he was in office, too, and respected his achievement as POTUS and CINC of the US Armed Forces.
Chris, while your friend may have a right to protest the engagement in Iraq, failure to report to duty is a criminal offense. Fortunately for defensive readiness, the troops don’t get to decide whether or not they feel like showing up when the nation goes to war. I’m pretty liberal, but it’s irrational to think we can “provide for the common defense” and let our troops pick their deployments. It’s an all-volunteer Army, and he chose to serve.
Whether he should be there is a good question, but not one he gets to answer at this point.
On that note, I truly wish your friend the best of luck and I hope he returns to his family safely. The same goes for every one of the other 130,000 troops in the Gulf. And you too!
Hmmm. Let me get this straight. Bush shouldn’t send supporters to run Iraq. Presumably then, he should send some Democrats who would like to see him fail, and who can’t even keep their own party’s act together let alone a country with actual shooting going on.
Good thinking, Mr. Allbritton. Maybe it makes sense to somebody.
Oh, yes, and what was the name of the fellow who held a gun to your friends head and made him sign up for the Reserves?
Ron
I think the point was that the administration should be sending the most qualified people (i.e. people who know something about nation-building and peacekeeping) to Iraq. Read the paragraph before the one that Chris quoted from the Marshall/Rozen/Soloway article:
“It’s not that Americans lack such experience. In the last decade particularly, many American officials acquired a great deal of expertise in post-conflict reconstruction in places like Bosnia, Kosovo, East Timor and in post-Communist countries in Eastern Europe and around the globe—expertise that could have been put to good use at the CPA. Names frequently mentioned are those of General Bill Nash, who commanded troops in the Gulf War and NATO operations in Bosnia; Robert Perito, former senior foreign service officer and deputy director of the Justice Department’s international police training program, who helped advise peacekeeping missions in Bosnia, East Timor, Kosovo, and helped organize post-conflict police training in Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia; Bob Gelbard, former U.S. presidential envoy to the Balkans; and retired Air Force Maj. Gen. Jacques Klein, who served in various capacities in the Balkans under the United States and the United Nations. Yet according to experts in the field, few of those with experience in these various deployments got the call to serve or even had their opinions solicited.”
This paragraph is also helpful:
“In the lead-up to war, the architects of the coming invasion fought endless rearguard battles against their enemies at the State Department and the C.I.A. to keep the major policy decisions firmly in their hands. And the process continued as they began to staff CPA itself, where they wrote off not only State Department employees (considered disloyal because State had resisted the hawks over Iraq strategy) but also anyone who worked at NGO’s (ideologically suspect) and those who had worked in Clinton’s government (ditto).”
Instead, the most important qualification for getting a position in post-war Iraq seems to be how much money you gave to Bush’s campaign, or how much you want to “screw” the Democrats. Which may make good campaign strategy, but doesn’t seem like the best way to help a new democracy take root.
With all respect to the previous poster, I would try to lower the sarcasm by a notch or three. It makes you sound childish. You have some thoughtful points to make, so why don’t you just make them?
it’s not that someone held a gun to someone’s head to join the rreserves, it’s that we are running out of soldiers to send over there, apparently. Enough so to warrent getting the reserves out to fill the gap. Most people in the reserves didn’t see it coming, and were somewhat shocked to find out their lives would be changing so drastically so quickly and for such a long time. How far off is a draft? We don’t know, hopefully never.
Hey I don’t particularly like the way women are treated in Islam either, but I don’t think the solution is to kill their husbands. In fact, most of Islam is changing before our very eyes in that rregard, especially in Iran, and not one of our bombs has helped the cause. Look at America about 100 years ago, and the way we treated women is not that far off from the way women are treated now in Islam. 100 years is nothing in the grand scheme of things. The fact is, people won’t change when you bully them into changing. Just thnk about yourself - if you’re a smoker and someone says that they’ll beat you up for smoking, you’ll probably want to take a drag off the cigarette and blow it in their face…
Of course it always sounds good to send the “most qualified” people into a situation. But if such people cannot be counted on to be aligned to one’s goals, that is a prescription for chaos. People can be corrupted by ego as easily as by money. The blog scene provides evidence enough of that.
Ron
Good point about sarcasm, Victor. Can I plead “bad day”?
Ron
Re Condoleeza, she was referring to her personal life when she denied long term planning. This in no way implies that she is unusually deficient in this skill when it comes to her work. We all know plenty of people are skilled at their jobs and have a personal life that is out of control. It is a specious argument.
Well, I will stop posting here now. I
Ron
Re Condoleeza, she was referring to her personal life when she denied long term planning. This in no way implies that she is unusually deficient in this skill when it comes to her work. We all know plenty of people are skilled at their jobs and have a personal life that is out of control. It is a specious argument.
Well, I will stop posting here now. I
Ron
The point that the Bush adminiatration is hiring it’s own people from the right to run things is very valid in my opinion. What we have seen here is a Commander in Chief that would rather further his own agenda’s at the expense of the people whom he represents. You don’t have to look far to realize that (take Haliburton, for example). This is just one more point against Mr. Bush being a good representative, and doing a good job.
Pissing in the wind here, likely, but:
Ron, we shouldn’t send Democrats, we should send democrats. People who realize that democracies are built from the bottom up, not the top down. People who will help the Iraqi people take on the mantle of democracy. People with experience in what the word democracy means. People who will respect the Iraqi people as (newly) freeborn individuals with the capability of governing themselves.
People who have experience in running elections. Not the politicos, but the county-level employees who have to set up election precincts, to get the polls up and running, to print the ballots, to assemble the workers necessary to man the polls, to assure the security of the secret ballot, to make sure that the ballots are counted correctly and are recountable (not like the Diebold system which has no recountable backup paper ballot), people who can provide security and assurance that the polls are not rigged, or that one group is not discouraging others from voting.
You know, Ron, democrats. Not power-hungry authoritarians who want to predetermine the results of elections, or to make sure that a Shia majority is deliberately weakened because they might not like the fact that the Shia ARE a majority. Not the sort of people who would seek to force a government friendly to American interests upon the people of Iraq.
Because if the government is established to meet OUR needs, then the government is not of, by and for the Iraqis. It would be of, by and for America’s needs. And that, Ron, is not democracy. That is empire.
Low blow. Cheap shot.
“Long term planning” in general is a flawed construct. Vision, focus, and flexibility trumps it.. I agree with your point about needing all the experience, expertise, and wisdom we can muster in Iraq —- and determination. What we don’t need is people who get all geeked up in their commitment to some particular plan of action and have difficulty adjusting from it.
Re: your statement that one’s personal life modus operandi carries over into one’s professional life, I often find great differences between the two “worlds”. In Rice’s case (for example) she’s the prototypical “individual contributor” in her personal life, but in her work is a member of a large team and manages others. VERY significant difference.
Ms. Rice was referring to her personal life, and Ron is correct in pointing that out. I was too busy/engaged in my work to have a plan for my personal life, but (to my surprise) was successful enough in starting a line of business that I retired in my late 50’s. Those who worked with me and projected my skills into my personal life would have been rudely surprised at how I ran THAT (or didn’t, as the case may be).
The comment above was mine. Name/address was left off inadvertently.