Ex-Commander Says Iraq Effort Is ‘a Nightmare’

[rmnunez]

So they've finally regrouped and reloaded, are back at it?

Across the country, 462 civilians were killed in December, according to icasualties.org, which tracks fatalities, down from 471 in November and 1,629 in December 2006.

Perhaps the insurgency/terrorists will recover enough to regain their past strength, but it looks like they are still a bit short as their body count is still lower than it was a month ago and just a quarter of what it was a year ago.

This attack on the mourners was very unusual:

either he was a relative or someone well known to the family

None of the survivors noticed any strangers and this fellow was right there in their midst.

[SynSistrSyndic@]

Note: No swear words were used in the writing of this (I don't think). However, I do strongly express my ideas, and it is lengthy.

Behold now my turbulent whims shall blow upon this realm and my voice shall cut the crackline between opinion and heresy (actually an impersonation of a recent acquaintance that which I feel makes a great intro warning the contents). This segment is about truth, power, and the truth with no power that this topic was based on. It is my turn to jump into this sticky ring and throw a few punches, make a few feints, and, ultimately, take a few blows.

My opinion/heresy; The appropriate people need to realize that all preceptive organs of many a nation's populous are on America right now, what with our growing crusader facade and deficit, our arrogance and pride, our dreams and vigorous lifestyles. Who are we kidding? We had a chance to vote, and seems that our collective voting body so chose to reelect Bush administration (though he suggested a recount of the votes of Florida, where a relative of his was governor). I refuse to listen to any more remarks against the administrative body that WE elected. As members of that democracy (that which I feel is like an often abused *insert most personal figurehead here* in a tourniquet), it is our duty to point out discrepancies and propose changes where they are felt needed. If that fails, revolution is an obligation. That is what we as a nation are based on. The power to declare war resides in the hands of the executive branch, and the reinstated inhabitant there always (to me) seemed to be quite ignorant or uncaring of the interest of the people and the roots.

As for the article itself, it does not state anything I (and many like minded entities) either knew or speculated that fateful day when the decision was made to go to war. It simply serves as yet another light slap (or scathing rebuke depending on your POV) from the media against current war policies coming from someone that to the standard average Joe might seem as an authentic figure of stature and authority on the subject.

“...Catastrophically flawed, unrealistically optimistic war plan”, well d'uh any idiot could deduct that declaring war on a foreign nation for an internal crisis is a god-awful, idiotic plan, and furthermore calling it a “war on terrorism” is the proud proclamation of a naive knave (a combination of two meanings for this word; 1) An unprincipled, crafty fellow, and 2) A man of humble birth). Point declared invalid/unessential for being a known fact several years prior to publishing.

“After more than four years of fighting, America continues its desperate struggle in Iraq without any concerted effort to devise a strategy that will achieve victory in that war-torn country or in the greater conflict against extremism,” another invalid point for being known, this one a few thousand years out of date. These people have been perfecting their fighting style, against each other, over a period of a few thousand years, and the same organization that so hastily entered with little or no plans does not have an effective strategy at subduing them or taking control of the situation? This is common sense. Our technology, organization, and standard of living in general surpasses their own by how many times (in our terms)? And we are still over there? Hello? Of course we have no plan over there. Our troops are over there biding time while (I suppose/presume) our intelligence gathers dirt on those that come from the sand and try to think up new reasons to fight them. War on terrorism, but no subsequent acts of terrorism. Hmm.

“There has been a glaring and unfortunate display of incompetent strategic leadership within our national leaders,” he said, adding that civilian officials have been “derelict in their duties” and guilty of a “lust for power.” ...Yawn. I will be submitting a complaint of plagiarism to the NYT for stealing exact lines from my paper I wrote in mid-2005 (I believe, in the time period somewhere around there).

This article serves to further prove my point that there are simply too many processes and human institutions that “facts” go through before they reach public ears, unless there so occurs the occasional slip. An “allegation” discharged from a news institution with little or no backing contradicts itself. The collective condom that is politics and media will not incubate any progressively different ideas in the minds of a modern nation (unless popular opinion demands it and the principle has been previously brought en mass to light; remember most media comes from profit organizations), where we are moderated by nothing other than our own compliance to the system and our own personal beliefs put into the frame of current trends and situations; though it continually prods with false hopes of birthing whatever the current desires of the nation may be. In fact, truth is a sterile mule so long as what hidden mechanizations are in the hearts of those surrounding those in power desire and aspire to achieve, and only the final decisions of changes by such propagations or prorogations facilitate formally reach “the masses'” ears. If, in the happy event an idea gets out and is well-received, it somewhat alters the institution or a small group of intellectuals therein, and may become the standard. Everyone perceives these things slightly differently, and thus negotiations and coming to terms is hard; I avoid use of another sexual analogy.

To the now-veteran; Oh bold move, criticize the system to whom you are a submissive eidelon of after you retire from it, that's always easy. This is the same as waiting until you are about die to repent for your life and it's sins (metaphorically speaking, religion has no need to enter this debate). I am talking of conformity not only in substance but also in method. The only time anything drastically against the system or it's methods is said by an official is when their money or lives are not at stake; how does that make the opposition look? Like a bunch of bloody cowards. The basis of this nation thus is failing in that notion; officials and people in general that openly oppose some principle do it in the form of propaganda, in places and times where they can save face away from people and places that hold “the buck” that is given to them. I do however, tip my hat to the bloke who offered this insight, for the few out there who may not have had enough intellect to deduct things stated there for themselves (though it is highly unlikely they will stumble upon the article, and even if they did, they don't know how to read).

But as to joining the war in the first place (seeing as it has been going on for millennia), I've thought it was a bad idea since I was a child to join wars first off on the basis that this is 2000 years past where Christian religions record the Messiah's first coming, and we have changed so much in every aspect of human relations, and thus we should not have to resort to such a barbaric, archaic means of settling “who's is bigger”; nay, we should not even have to have a dozen (or more) “secret” institutions based around gathering information on other nations or armies to field against our alleged opposition. But no, I guess, as stated before no utopia exists, and man can walk this Earth a billion years and never find true peace, for violence is truly the only language we speak. Through working together, look what we have created. Through working together, look what has been destroyed in the past and look what destruction we are causing today.

I am no revolutionary, and I feel some of my ideals may be contradictory, or else make me look naive, but cowardice in the face of something you believe in causes my temper to ignite to levels of utmost sincerity and serendipity. Say what you mean, and mean what you say, because someone somewhere may hear you and take your words in arms against you, or else be inspired in a good way. We are cognitive beasts, us humans; our sentience separates us from the beasts of the field; though unfortunately when it applies to conflict it means that we have the means of killing more efficiently. When you hold a position of power or the limelight, you must choose your words carefully. I am sorry if my own only cause spite or tribulation, but this article truly stuck a nerve.

Now, on a more optimistic note, the article does seem to attempt to stimulate feelings of hope and engender a less-than-false atmosphere of change by explaining how diplomatic relations are going well in Iraq, and through it's miasma of several one-sentence paragraphs, I actually managed to claim a few tidbits I hadn't considered or heard of as of yet, usually those including proper names other than “Bush”.

But ultimately, it's an untimely criticism. It's, as stated before, yet another insignificant person jumping on the blame wagon. It's done, it's in the past, lets look to changing the situation, not continually berating those who have long stood accused with no actions taken against them, those who hold the power anyway and only scoff at the continued rebukes. If you want the situation to change, get involved. Go to rallies, protest, or begin thinking of a new form of government that would be widely accepted and won't have to go through the current one's processes for 100 years being validated. But whatever you do, don't bring back the hippies. Campaigns for peace don't come off well when the protestants are high and saying “I love ya man”.

-SSS

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: SynSistrSyndic@ My opinion/heresy; The appropriate people need to realize that all preceptive organs of many a nation's populous are on America right now, what with our growing crusader facade and deficit, our arrogance and pride, our dreams and vigorous lifestyles.

Sorry dood, I pretty much gave up reading by this point.... you're way too in love with the act of writing.

"...preceptive organs of many a nation's populous"

???????

I don't need to wade through a 700 word excercise in florid prose to know that Boy George is a boob. Go for clear and concise next time, and welcome to Volconvo.

.

[SynSistrSyndic@]

Sorry.

I'm done going insane.

I'll be less weird/more to the point in subsequent posts.

Edit; btw, thanks for the greeting. I'll pipe down a little for a while and test the water, get to know how each individual thinks.

[Sonart]

.
No problem... to paraphrase Morpheus,

"Quit trying to write and just write!"

[rmnunez]

Incontrovertible proof the "surge" has worked and produced the desired result:

Parliamentary blocs representing Sunnis, Shiites and independents on Sunday signed on to a common platform stressing the need for Iraqi national unity and central control over oil reserves. Among those who signed the statement of common understanding are the movement of radical Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, the secular Iraqi National List of former prime minister Iyad Allawi and Sunni leader Salah al-Mutlak's National Dialogue Front, a joint statement said. Iraq Shiite and Sunni MPs sign new 'unity' pact - Yahoo! Singapore News

[grandpa]

This isn't worth a new thread, so here goes:

A rift over U.S. troop cuts in Iraq | csmonitor.com Washington - President Bush has declared that the planned troop drawdown in Iraq is "on track," but within the Defense Department, signs of disagreement are emerging over how much further US forces can be cut later this year. At issue is how much of a drawdown is possible after the expected departure of five combat brigades from Iraq this summer.

Here are my suggestions:

Why not let the Iraqi people decide? Failing that, how about the troops?

Grandpa h.

[rmnunez]

Better yet, by a show of hands among united statians at their nearest city square?

Since when have strategic decisions involving military deployments been sensibly resolved through democratic processes?

[grandpa]

Quote by: rmnunez Better yet, by a show of hands among united statians at their nearest city square? Since when have strategic decisions involving military deployments been sensibly resolved through democratic processes?

Sorry, I made the mistake of assuming people can operate on something other than totalitarian standards.

It is a staged show, yes. We're not supposed to ask questions, let alone voice and act upon any objections. We should "sensibly" rely on the experts to decide everything on our behalf, and be shuffled around like a deck of cards.

Grandpa h.

[xyzer]

I agree with your wise thinking rmnunez! Letting the inexpert distant observers decide military strategy and tactics is akin to ridiculous.

Since when have strategic decisions involving military deployments been sensibly resolved through democratic processes?

Surely those on the ground in Iraq and in tune with military capabilities should make such decisions. Not ill informed people in Paducah. Or heaven help us, armchair generals sitting in Congress.

I fear I'm reading the usual 'cacaphonous bowel sounds' in print. These origiinate from the nether regions of the anti war zealots. Reason is replaced with a sort of 'laughing buttocks' refrain that stinks!

[grandpa]

Quote by: xyzer I agree with your wise thinking rmnunez! Letting the inexpert distant observers decide military strategy and tactics is akin to ridiculous.

So it's "wise" to not let Iraqis and US troops decide their own fates? I suppose that's true, if we assume the "experts" are utterly incapable of doing anything ridiculous, such as devastating and destabilizing foriegn countries.

Grandpa h.

[rmnunez]

Of course its wise to not let the troops and locals decide their own fates, how could you even think it would be otherwise? The locals have no discretion -they're occupied remember, their fate is up to their occupier!

As far as the troops deciding what their fate is to be, this is ridiculous, its never been the case, their fate is decided by their commanders, that's why soldiers wear rank on their uniform, the more rank, the more fate you get to decide, that's the way the military works, always has.

[grandpa]

Quote by: rmnunez Of course its wise to not let the troops and locals decide their own fates, how could you even think it would be otherwise? The locals have no discretion -they're occupied remember, their fate is up to their occupier!

Sure, what am I talking about? Why would any sane person assume totalitarian standards are negative?

There's a problem, thougj, and I'll put it in form of a question:
Would YOU enjoy spending countless hours with foreign troops roaming your streets, fostering also an influx of carbombers? Would you feel it right that they've dropped bombs around the country, perhaps even on your house? How about damaging the infrastructure, having the land vandalized and degraded? Would you not consider taking up arms?

But you did put the colonial mindset very well: the locals have no discretion -- yet somehow it's still "Freedom" and "Democracy" America is bringing to them.

Grandpa h.

[rmnunez]

Gramps, I suspect you are labouring under the misapprehension the insurgency in Iraq is some sort of grass-roots movement fostered by resistance to foreign occupation and the violence resulting thereform. This is your mistake, that is not the situation in Iraq. Your error is reasonable because this is what one would normally expect from a foreign military occupation, as your question suggests. You, me and most posters here, would likely rise up in opposition to any foreign force in our country, we have a lot to lose, our governments are mostly legitimate and representative, we have rights. This situation was not analogous under Saddam.

[grandpa]

'If there is no change in three months, there will be war again' - Middle East, World - Independent.co.uk

A crucial Iraqi ally of the United States in its recent successes in the country is threatening to withdraw his support and allow al-Qa'ida to return if his fighters are not incorporated into the Iraqi army and police. "If there is no change in three months there will be war again," said Abu Marouf, the commander of 13,000 fighters who formerly fought the Americans.

[rmnunez]

How does Abu Marouf get along with Mr. Mahdi? Is he Sunni or Shia? Do you really think he has 13 thousand 'insurgents'?

[grandpa]

Another reason to call the Iraq War a nightmare:

Iraq conflict has killed a million, says survey

LONDON, Jan 30 (Reuters) - More than one million Iraqis have died as a result of the conflict in their country since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, according to research conducted by one of Britain's leading polling groups. The survey, conducted by Opinion Research Business (ORB) with 2,414 adults in face-to-face interviews, found that 20 percent of people had had at least one death in their household as a result of the conflict, rather than natural causes.

[grandpa]

Still another update:

Pentagon brass split on troop cuts

A new burst of violence in Iraq sharpens the differences among U.S. military leaders over how to balance the risk of pulling U.S. troops out too quickly and the danger of waiting too long. At stake are the chances for success in Iraq as well as the long-term health of the U.S. military.

Notice the subtle bias in this article; it assumes there are "chances for success." Again, it's subtle, but it means something.

Grandpa h.

[thx1138]

just goes to show this is not meant to be short term, there is no real plan to withdraw troops from Iraq.

[rmnunez]

the subtle bias in this article; it assumes there are "chances for success."

I suppose for you to find the article objective it would have to acknowledge there are no chances of success?