kelpdiver 2 #26 August 26, 2008 Quote While you have a good point, I think we became morally obligated to the Iraqi people when we invaded their country and removed their government, so the rebuilding can't really be considered a separate and distinct action. If the invasion itself was immoral, as many argue, then can you hold them to this morality? I still see them as distinct. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #27 August 26, 2008 QuoteQuote While you have a good point, I think we became morally obligated to the Iraqi people when we invaded their country and removed their government, so the rebuilding can't really be considered a separate and distinct action. If the invasion itself was immoral, as many argue, then can you hold them to this morality? I still see them as distinct. Well, a teenager shouldn't hold a party at his parents' house while they're away for a weekend. If he does anyhow, he has then obligated himself to clean up the mess that results from said party. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #28 August 26, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuote While you have a good point, I think we became morally obligated to the Iraqi people when we invaded their country and removed their government, so the rebuilding can't really be considered a separate and distinct action. If the invasion itself was immoral, as many argue, then can you hold them to this morality? I still see them as distinct. Well, a teenager shouldn't hold a party at his parents' house while they're away for a weekend. If he does anyhow, he has then obligated himself to clean up the mess that results from said party. Blues, Dave That's about not getting caught. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #29 August 26, 2008 QuoteQuote While you have a good point, I think we became morally obligated to the Iraqi people when we invaded their country and removed their government, so the rebuilding can't really be considered a separate and distinct action. If the invasion itself was immoral, as many argue, then can you hold them to this morality? I still see them as distinct. I can see Dave’s point and find much with which to empathize in his thinking and intentions. I don't see a necessity to force a linkage between pre-OIF strategy/actions and post-OIF strategy/actions. Oppressive dictators tend to be stable. Oppressive but stable ... because dissent and protest is brutally squelched. The US-led OIF removed that stability. It is in the US interest that post-Saddam Husayn Iraq not become a failed state. It was/is in the US interest to execute and implement stability, security, transition, and reconstruction (SSTR) in Iraq and in Afghanistan. Quasi-requisite link to my favorite DoDD. "T" & "R" are still inter-agency hot potatoes. Sigh... VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #30 August 26, 2008 Quote No. I didn't think then, nor do I now, we should invade Iraq. I'm happy Saddam is gone. I don't think we should pull out now all willy-nilly. The Iraqi government wants us gone. For some reason the US govt wants to stay.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #31 August 27, 2008 Quote The Iraqi government wants us gone. For some reason the US govt wants to stay. Hand shoots up in the air.......oh oh oh oh..... Pick me....pick me Professor Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Muenkel 0 #32 August 27, 2008 I was truly on the fence in regard to us going into Iraq. Saddam was a brutal dictator that was responsible for the mass murders and torture of so many Iraqis. Iraqi citizens were helpless. He also was raping the shit out of the oil for food program and it truly appeared that the UN had no plans of putting an end to it. Hindsight is a waste of time. I never believed we would lose 3000 lives and how many Iraqi citizens would be lost. I blame it on my naivete. Has it all been worth it? All I can answer is that only history will tell. My hunch is that our government and its allies want to be in the neighborhood keeping a close presence to Iran and Syria. _________________________________________ Chris Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #33 August 27, 2008 QuoteHas it all been worth it? All I can answer is that only history will tell. I'm not sure history tells such tales, as we never know what would have happened if a different approach had been taken. QuoteMy hunch is that our government and its allies want to be in the neighborhood keeping a close presence to Iran and Syria. I don't think it's a coincidence that once we'd (righteously) deposed the Taliban and gained access to a big chunk of Iran's eastern border, we leap-frogged over to Iraq and seized access to most of Iran's western border. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Muenkel 0 #34 August 27, 2008 I completely agree. _________________________________________ Chris Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnDeere 0 #35 August 27, 2008 Quote In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Has it all been worth it? All I can answer is that only history will tell. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm not sure history tells such tales, as we never know what would have happened if a different approach had been taken. Hmmm i wonder what would have happend if Hitler had a little more time on his hand???Nothing opens like a Deere! You ignorant fool! Checks are for workers! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
akarunway 1 #36 August 27, 2008 Quote Quote Imagine you could go back 5 years and it was your decision whether or not the US invades Iraq. If you knew it would turn out like this, would you or would you not trade 3000 US lives (and thousands of Iraqi lives) in order to remove Saddam from office and execute him. Dave, your description is not accurate. We did not trade 3000+ US lives to remove him and execute him. That cost considerably fewer lives. The trade of 3000 was to attempt nation building, which was not necessary if the goal was just to remove Saddam. I still would have removed him, would have left in 2004, right when many of you insisted we had to stick around and trade more lives. Bush Sr. (and his advisors) had the right idea to begin w. Nuetralize the threat and get the fuck out. Saddamn was well contained. I'll bet he's wringing his hands every day w/ what his son has done. Thank god it's over. (the worst part anyway) Unless mcCain gets in and really starts WW3.I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
birdlike 0 #37 August 27, 2008 QuoteImagine you could go back 5 years and it was your decision whether or not the US invades Iraq. If you knew it would turn out like this, would you or would you not trade 3000 US lives (and thousands of Iraqi lives) in order to remove Saddam from office and execute him. Blues, Dave What a ridiculous question from word one. No one ever said that the purpose of the mission was to execute Saddam Hussein. What an idiotic poll.Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
birdlike 0 #38 August 27, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Choices are kind of leading dont you think? They're not worded exactly opposite of each other, which was a mistake, but they're also not terribly biased. If you were given the option of sacrificing 3000 service members for Saddam's removal from office and execution, you either would or would not take it. Which is it? Personally, I would not. Blues, Dave You did it again. ...sacrificing 3000 ......... Care to try again? Dont you see you framed the pole in a way that anyone disagreeing with you does not have a choice they can make? Don't you know?... That's only wrong if I do it, dude. What the fuck are you thinking?! Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
birdlike 0 #39 August 27, 2008 QuoteWhat word would you prefer I use in my question? Note that it's my question, you don't get to change it to a totally different question. Why didn't you say, "The result of the invasion has been 3000 servicemen dead. Do you feel that was worth what we have gotten in return?" What the fuck is so hard about that? It doesn't ask for people to imagine that they had prescience back in 2003, which is stupid.Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nerdgirl 0 #40 August 27, 2008 QuoteQuoteImagine you could go back 5 years and it was your decision whether or not the US invades Iraq. If you knew it would turn out like this, would you or would you not trade 3000 US lives (and thousands of Iraqi lives) in order to remove Saddam from office and execute him. What a ridiculous question from word one. No one ever said that the purpose of the mission was to execute Saddam Hussein. What an idiotic poll. That’s also not what Dave wrote. Your statement is specious. Removing Saddam Hussayn from power was the purpose of OIF. From the White House Transcripts of President Bush’s address to the nation on 17 March 2003: “President Says Saddam Hussein Must Leave Iraq Within 48 Hours “Saddam Hussein and his sons must leave Iraq within 48 hours. Their refusal to do so will result in military conflict, commenced at a time of our choosing. … The tyrant will soon be gone.” “If Saddam Hussein attempts to cling to power, he will remain a deadly foe until the end.” VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,150 #41 August 27, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteImagine you could go back 5 years and it was your decision whether or not the US invades Iraq. If you knew it would turn out like this, would you or would you not trade 3000 US lives (and thousands of Iraqi lives) in order to remove Saddam from office and execute him. What a ridiculous question from word one. No one ever said that the purpose of the mission was to execute Saddam Hussein. What an idiotic poll. That’s also not what Dave wrote. Your statement is specious. Removing Saddam Hussayn from power was the purpose of OIF. From the White House Transcripts of President Bush’s address to the nation on 17 March 2003: “President Says Saddam Hussein Must Leave Iraq Within 48 Hours “Saddam Hussein and his sons must leave Iraq within 48 hours. Their refusal to do so will result in military conflict, commenced at a time of our choosing. … The tyrant will soon be gone.” “If Saddam Hussein attempts to cling to power, he will remain a deadly foe until the end.” VR/Marg Are you bothering birdlike with mere FACTS again?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #42 August 27, 2008 Quote Are you bothering birdlike with mere FACTS again? The problem is.. the FACTS are not 3000http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/casualties/ There have been 4,462 coalition deaths -- 4,148 Americans, two Australians, one Azerbaijani, 176 Britons, 13 Bulgarians, one Czech, seven Danes, two Dutch, two Estonians, one Fijian, five Georgians, one Hungarian, 33 Italians, one Kazakh, one Korean, three Latvians, 22 Poles, three Romanians, five Salvadoran, four Slovaks, 11 Spaniards, two Thai and 18 Ukrainians -- in the war in Iraq as of August 26, 2008, Perhaps those who support their president so vociferously.. SHOULD be forced to read this list of names.... the dates... and the way that they died. EVERY LAST ONE OF THEMIn my mind I truly believe there was no need for even one of these people to die in this optional war...brought on by arrogance and greed as so many wars in our history have been foisted upon the common man. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JohnRich 4 #43 August 27, 2008 QuoteA poll using the advantage of "hindsight" is irrelevant. When events happen, you don't have perfect future hindsight with which to make your choices. Knowledge is imperfect. You make the best choices you can with what information you have. No one knows what the actual outcome will later be. Furthermore... It's obvious that everyone can make perfect decisions given perfect hindsight. But that ain't the real world. So this poll is baloney. Additionally, the point in time which you choose to look back at something can also change the perspective. For example, if you asked people today, if it was worth 300,000 American lives to save the world from horrors of Hitler and Tojo, as horrible as that sacrifice was, they would probably say "Yes, it was worth it." That's because with the passing of 50 years, and the perspective of history and reflection, it is recognized that the world would be a far worse place without that sacrifice, and that tens of millions of people would have continued to die and have their freedom destroyed. Sometimes, you have to make sacrifices to fight tyranny. Freedom isn't free. And that brings me back to the case of Iraq. It is premature to make judgments at this time about whether or not the sacrifice of 3,000 Americans has been worth it. Because we do not yet know how things are going to turn out in the long run. If we cut-and-run and let tyranny return, then it will have been wasted. On the other hand, if it changes the political climate in the Middle East, dragging tens of millions of people out of oppressed third-world impoverished lives, into the modern era with freedom and prosperity, then it will have been worth it. So everyone who is making judgments about this situation today, has not the basis to do so correctly. Only history will determine that. I now return you to your regular programming of partisan bullshit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,150 #44 August 27, 2008 Pathetic that you are still excusing the lies.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 23 #45 August 27, 2008 Pathetic that you are still lieing about lies."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nerdgirl 0 #46 August 27, 2008 QuoteQuoteA poll using the advantage of "hindsight" is irrelevant. When events happen, you don't have perfect future hindsight with which to make your choices. Knowledge is imperfect. You make the best choices you can with what information you have. No one knows what the actual outcome will later be. Furthermore... It's obvious that everyone can make perfect decisions given perfect hindsight. But that ain't the real world. So this poll is baloney. Additionally, the point in time which you choose to look back at something can also change the perspective. So everyone who is making judgments about this situation today, has not the basis to do so correctly. Only history will determine that. I now return you to your regular programming of partisan bullshit. While thinking about the unintended or unexpected consequences of our or US foreign policy actions may have zero ability to impact the past, one would hope that “lessons learned” might be available sooner than 50 years past. For example, “On Point: The United States Army in Operation Iraqi Freedom” was released in May 2004: “On Point is a study of Operation IRAQI FREEDOM (OIF) as soon after the fact as feasible. The Army leadership chartered this effort in a message to the major commands on 30 April 2003. In his guidance, Army Chief of Staff General Eric K. Shinseki directed ‘a quick, thorough review that looks at the US Army’s performance, assesses the role it played in the joint and coalition team, and captures the strategic, operational, and tactical lessons that should be disseminated and applied in future fights.’” The Center for Army Lessons Learned (CALL) at Ft Leavenworth released “On Point II, Transition to the New Campaign: The United States Army in Operation Iraqi Freedom May 2003-January 2005” in July. National Defense University (NDU), located at Fort McNair, released INSS Occasional Paper 5, “Choosing War: The Decision to Invade Iraq and Its Aftermath” that criticized planning for OIF: “This study examines how the United States chose to go to war in Iraq, how its decisionmaking process functioned, and what can be done to improve that process. The central finding of this study is that U.S. efforts in Iraq were hobbled by a set of faulty assumptions, a flawed planning effort, and a continuing inability to create security conditions in Iraq that could have fostered meaningful advances in stabilization, reconstruction, and governance. With the best of intentions, the United States toppled a vile, dangerous regime but has been unable to replace it with a stable entity. Even allowing for progress under the Surge, the study insists that mistakes in the Iraq operation cry out in the mid- to long-term for improvements in the U.S. decisionmaking and policy execution systems.” The author, Joseph Collins, is a retired Army colonel who served as deputy assistant secretary of defense for stability operations in 2002. Consideration of Lessons Learned from OIF has not been limited to the Army, the USMC did its first critical review in May 2003, "Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) Lessons Learned": "Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) provided a rare opportunity to understand what works and what does not work in real conflict." Link to other DoD written “Lessons Learned” on OIF, OEF, and GWOT. Rather than waiting 10 or 20 years, it is critical to tap and record the memories, impressions, and electrons (email, etc) now, before they fade or meld/morph into reminiscents viewed through colored lens of memory or are deleted. Because one does not like or disagrees with the opinions or the outcomes does not make it irrelevant or partisan or biased or skewed ... unless one is also willing to assert that those products from the US Army CALL to the USMC to UK MOD are to be considered similarly. And yes, the perspective is likely to change as time progresses, whether the image in the rear-view mirror of history is likely to be better (vindicating US foreign policy choices) or worse is less than certain. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Muenkel 0 #47 August 27, 2008 Quote Rather than waiting 10 or 20 years, it is critical to tap and record the memories, impressions, and electrons (email, etc) now, before they fade or meld/morph into reminiscents viewed through colored lens of memory or are deleted. Because one does not like or disagrees with the opinions or the outcomes does not make it irrelevant or partisan or biased or skewed ... unless one is also willing to assert that those products from the US Army CALL to the USMC to UK MOD are to be considered similarly. And yes, the perspective is likely to change as time progresses, whether the image in the rear-view mirror of history is likely to be better (vindicating US foreign policy choices) or worse is less than certain. VR/Marg Absolutely right on the money!!! Marg, I feel like we should be paying you tuition. _________________________________________ Chris Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,150 #48 August 27, 2008 Quote Pathetic that you are still lieing about lies. Riiiggghhht... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites birdlike 0 #49 August 28, 2008 Quote Are you bothering birdlike with mere FACTS again? Yeah -- doesn't she know that like you, I am impervious?! Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites birdlike 0 #50 August 28, 2008 QuotePathetic that you are still excusing the lies. Even more pathetic is that you are so wrapped up in your pat response of calling JohnRich a liar, you probably didn't even really read what he said. I find it hard to argue with the sensibility of the following: ***And that brings me back to the case of Iraq. It is premature to make judgments at this time about whether or not the sacrifice of 3,000 Americans has been worth it. Because we do not yet know how things are going to turn out in the long run. If we cut-and-run and let tyranny return, then it will have been wasted. On the other hand, if it changes the political climate in the Middle East, dragging tens of millions of people out of oppressed third-world impoverished lives, into the modern era with freedom and prosperity, then it will have been worth it. So everyone who is making judgments about this situation today, has not the basis to do so correctly. Only history will determine that. I guess we can put a "~" in front of each of his points, and you agree with the negated form of each? If we cut and run now, the 3,000 lives with "~" have been wasted? We do "~" not yet know how things will turn out in the long run in the Middle East? It is "~" worth 3,000 lives to drag millions out of oppression, tyranny and poverty? Hmm...Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #40 August 27, 2008 QuoteQuoteImagine you could go back 5 years and it was your decision whether or not the US invades Iraq. If you knew it would turn out like this, would you or would you not trade 3000 US lives (and thousands of Iraqi lives) in order to remove Saddam from office and execute him. What a ridiculous question from word one. No one ever said that the purpose of the mission was to execute Saddam Hussein. What an idiotic poll. That’s also not what Dave wrote. Your statement is specious. Removing Saddam Hussayn from power was the purpose of OIF. From the White House Transcripts of President Bush’s address to the nation on 17 March 2003: “President Says Saddam Hussein Must Leave Iraq Within 48 Hours “Saddam Hussein and his sons must leave Iraq within 48 hours. Their refusal to do so will result in military conflict, commenced at a time of our choosing. … The tyrant will soon be gone.” “If Saddam Hussein attempts to cling to power, he will remain a deadly foe until the end.” VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #41 August 27, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteImagine you could go back 5 years and it was your decision whether or not the US invades Iraq. If you knew it would turn out like this, would you or would you not trade 3000 US lives (and thousands of Iraqi lives) in order to remove Saddam from office and execute him. What a ridiculous question from word one. No one ever said that the purpose of the mission was to execute Saddam Hussein. What an idiotic poll. That’s also not what Dave wrote. Your statement is specious. Removing Saddam Hussayn from power was the purpose of OIF. From the White House Transcripts of President Bush’s address to the nation on 17 March 2003: “President Says Saddam Hussein Must Leave Iraq Within 48 Hours “Saddam Hussein and his sons must leave Iraq within 48 hours. Their refusal to do so will result in military conflict, commenced at a time of our choosing. … The tyrant will soon be gone.” “If Saddam Hussein attempts to cling to power, he will remain a deadly foe until the end.” VR/Marg Are you bothering birdlike with mere FACTS again?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #42 August 27, 2008 Quote Are you bothering birdlike with mere FACTS again? The problem is.. the FACTS are not 3000http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/casualties/ There have been 4,462 coalition deaths -- 4,148 Americans, two Australians, one Azerbaijani, 176 Britons, 13 Bulgarians, one Czech, seven Danes, two Dutch, two Estonians, one Fijian, five Georgians, one Hungarian, 33 Italians, one Kazakh, one Korean, three Latvians, 22 Poles, three Romanians, five Salvadoran, four Slovaks, 11 Spaniards, two Thai and 18 Ukrainians -- in the war in Iraq as of August 26, 2008, Perhaps those who support their president so vociferously.. SHOULD be forced to read this list of names.... the dates... and the way that they died. EVERY LAST ONE OF THEMIn my mind I truly believe there was no need for even one of these people to die in this optional war...brought on by arrogance and greed as so many wars in our history have been foisted upon the common man. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #43 August 27, 2008 QuoteA poll using the advantage of "hindsight" is irrelevant. When events happen, you don't have perfect future hindsight with which to make your choices. Knowledge is imperfect. You make the best choices you can with what information you have. No one knows what the actual outcome will later be. Furthermore... It's obvious that everyone can make perfect decisions given perfect hindsight. But that ain't the real world. So this poll is baloney. Additionally, the point in time which you choose to look back at something can also change the perspective. For example, if you asked people today, if it was worth 300,000 American lives to save the world from horrors of Hitler and Tojo, as horrible as that sacrifice was, they would probably say "Yes, it was worth it." That's because with the passing of 50 years, and the perspective of history and reflection, it is recognized that the world would be a far worse place without that sacrifice, and that tens of millions of people would have continued to die and have their freedom destroyed. Sometimes, you have to make sacrifices to fight tyranny. Freedom isn't free. And that brings me back to the case of Iraq. It is premature to make judgments at this time about whether or not the sacrifice of 3,000 Americans has been worth it. Because we do not yet know how things are going to turn out in the long run. If we cut-and-run and let tyranny return, then it will have been wasted. On the other hand, if it changes the political climate in the Middle East, dragging tens of millions of people out of oppressed third-world impoverished lives, into the modern era with freedom and prosperity, then it will have been worth it. So everyone who is making judgments about this situation today, has not the basis to do so correctly. Only history will determine that. I now return you to your regular programming of partisan bullshit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #44 August 27, 2008 Pathetic that you are still excusing the lies.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #45 August 27, 2008 Pathetic that you are still lieing about lies."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #46 August 27, 2008 QuoteQuoteA poll using the advantage of "hindsight" is irrelevant. When events happen, you don't have perfect future hindsight with which to make your choices. Knowledge is imperfect. You make the best choices you can with what information you have. No one knows what the actual outcome will later be. Furthermore... It's obvious that everyone can make perfect decisions given perfect hindsight. But that ain't the real world. So this poll is baloney. Additionally, the point in time which you choose to look back at something can also change the perspective. So everyone who is making judgments about this situation today, has not the basis to do so correctly. Only history will determine that. I now return you to your regular programming of partisan bullshit. While thinking about the unintended or unexpected consequences of our or US foreign policy actions may have zero ability to impact the past, one would hope that “lessons learned” might be available sooner than 50 years past. For example, “On Point: The United States Army in Operation Iraqi Freedom” was released in May 2004: “On Point is a study of Operation IRAQI FREEDOM (OIF) as soon after the fact as feasible. The Army leadership chartered this effort in a message to the major commands on 30 April 2003. In his guidance, Army Chief of Staff General Eric K. Shinseki directed ‘a quick, thorough review that looks at the US Army’s performance, assesses the role it played in the joint and coalition team, and captures the strategic, operational, and tactical lessons that should be disseminated and applied in future fights.’” The Center for Army Lessons Learned (CALL) at Ft Leavenworth released “On Point II, Transition to the New Campaign: The United States Army in Operation Iraqi Freedom May 2003-January 2005” in July. National Defense University (NDU), located at Fort McNair, released INSS Occasional Paper 5, “Choosing War: The Decision to Invade Iraq and Its Aftermath” that criticized planning for OIF: “This study examines how the United States chose to go to war in Iraq, how its decisionmaking process functioned, and what can be done to improve that process. The central finding of this study is that U.S. efforts in Iraq were hobbled by a set of faulty assumptions, a flawed planning effort, and a continuing inability to create security conditions in Iraq that could have fostered meaningful advances in stabilization, reconstruction, and governance. With the best of intentions, the United States toppled a vile, dangerous regime but has been unable to replace it with a stable entity. Even allowing for progress under the Surge, the study insists that mistakes in the Iraq operation cry out in the mid- to long-term for improvements in the U.S. decisionmaking and policy execution systems.” The author, Joseph Collins, is a retired Army colonel who served as deputy assistant secretary of defense for stability operations in 2002. Consideration of Lessons Learned from OIF has not been limited to the Army, the USMC did its first critical review in May 2003, "Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) Lessons Learned": "Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) provided a rare opportunity to understand what works and what does not work in real conflict." Link to other DoD written “Lessons Learned” on OIF, OEF, and GWOT. Rather than waiting 10 or 20 years, it is critical to tap and record the memories, impressions, and electrons (email, etc) now, before they fade or meld/morph into reminiscents viewed through colored lens of memory or are deleted. Because one does not like or disagrees with the opinions or the outcomes does not make it irrelevant or partisan or biased or skewed ... unless one is also willing to assert that those products from the US Army CALL to the USMC to UK MOD are to be considered similarly. And yes, the perspective is likely to change as time progresses, whether the image in the rear-view mirror of history is likely to be better (vindicating US foreign policy choices) or worse is less than certain. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Muenkel 0 #47 August 27, 2008 Quote Rather than waiting 10 or 20 years, it is critical to tap and record the memories, impressions, and electrons (email, etc) now, before they fade or meld/morph into reminiscents viewed through colored lens of memory or are deleted. Because one does not like or disagrees with the opinions or the outcomes does not make it irrelevant or partisan or biased or skewed ... unless one is also willing to assert that those products from the US Army CALL to the USMC to UK MOD are to be considered similarly. And yes, the perspective is likely to change as time progresses, whether the image in the rear-view mirror of history is likely to be better (vindicating US foreign policy choices) or worse is less than certain. VR/Marg Absolutely right on the money!!! Marg, I feel like we should be paying you tuition. _________________________________________ Chris Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #48 August 27, 2008 Quote Pathetic that you are still lieing about lies. Riiiggghhht... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
birdlike 0 #49 August 28, 2008 Quote Are you bothering birdlike with mere FACTS again? Yeah -- doesn't she know that like you, I am impervious?! Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
birdlike 0 #50 August 28, 2008 QuotePathetic that you are still excusing the lies. Even more pathetic is that you are so wrapped up in your pat response of calling JohnRich a liar, you probably didn't even really read what he said. I find it hard to argue with the sensibility of the following: ***And that brings me back to the case of Iraq. It is premature to make judgments at this time about whether or not the sacrifice of 3,000 Americans has been worth it. Because we do not yet know how things are going to turn out in the long run. If we cut-and-run and let tyranny return, then it will have been wasted. On the other hand, if it changes the political climate in the Middle East, dragging tens of millions of people out of oppressed third-world impoverished lives, into the modern era with freedom and prosperity, then it will have been worth it. So everyone who is making judgments about this situation today, has not the basis to do so correctly. Only history will determine that. I guess we can put a "~" in front of each of his points, and you agree with the negated form of each? If we cut and run now, the 3,000 lives with "~" have been wasted? We do "~" not yet know how things will turn out in the long run in the Middle East? It is "~" worth 3,000 lives to drag millions out of oppression, tyranny and poverty? Hmm...Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
