|
Post by Ceci on May 1, 2007 21:03:30 GMT -5
Today is the fourth anniversary of the proclaimation by President Bush that the war in Iraq was, indeed over. Little did he know that the conflict in Iraq was about to get started. In years past, this day has been rather reviled because the evidence about what was being done in Iraq had resurfaced in the form of insurgents, civil wars and of course the contention that the evidence leading up to warfare was allegedly falsified. And now, the Congressional Democrats has even served their bill to the President on this day to make a point. Mr. Bush, of course, vetoed it, the second veto in his entire Administration. The Washington Post's Dan Froomkin has a very interesting article discussing the impact of Mr. Bush's "Mission Accomplished" speech on not only national policy, but on the influence on foreign relations. It is a little long, but it is quite a read for anyone who is interested. What are your thoughts on this? What does the "Mission Accomplished" speech mean to you?
|
|
SeventhSeal17
Junior CNV Member
Featured CNV Contributor
Posts: 86
|
Post by SeventhSeal17 on May 8, 2007 23:03:03 GMT -5
What do I think? I think occupations always fail. We will fail. We have failed.
America and the world surrounding it is changing... the adminstration won't recognize this.
|
|
|
Post by Ceci on May 9, 2007 3:56:09 GMT -5
What do I think? I think occupations always fail. We will fail. We have failed. Occupations always produce a dark mark in the annals of history as well. The problem that I have is the fact that the current Adminstration of the United Stated did not realize what they were getting into when they started the "Shock and Awe" bombing of Baghdad. Everytime I think about that day, not only the loss of life bothers me, but the destruction of the national monuments and museums that would have given clues to early civilization. The other thing that bothers me is how Mr. Rumsfeld and others in the Bush Administration had referred to the loss of life and its repercussions as "collateral damage". It is as if they didn't care and perceived that there is a means to an end. They had enough hubris and arrogance to believe that they were going to "change things" in Iraq without realizing the fallout that might happen. The worst of it is that they are supposed to be knowledgable about the tactics of warfare and their impact on history enough to know what happens when Colonialism occurs. Clearly, America is a colonialist country when they are occupying Iraq. I know that a lot of people will not think of it this way, nor will they believe it. But in terms of the patterns of Colonial countries in the past (i.e. Britain, Portugal, France, etc.), America is following in their footsteps when employing their policies of democracy on the people of Iraq. What comes out of it is a flawed action based on the age old perception that all countries overseas are supposed to just stand-by when America does things because of their "Superpower" status. Unfortunately, this is because there is a lot of arrogance in the White House, and not much insight into the repercussions of their act. Reading the PNAC document, you can intellectually surmise why the current Administration is following this tactic. But on a personal level after seeing the utter destruction that Iraq and Afghanistan is in, it is not hard to wonder why are they doing this when so many lives are at stake.
|
|
SeventhSeal17
Junior CNV Member
Featured CNV Contributor
Posts: 86
|
Post by SeventhSeal17 on May 9, 2007 15:51:09 GMT -5
I think what it boils down to is this: We have stacked our deck with Cold War politics and tactics and have not updated our political standing.
Things have changed to certain shades of grey ever since the Soviet Union collapsed under it's own weight. Cold War politics were easy: Soviets go there, we go here. We go here, Soviets go there. I have always used the analogy of a game of Chess, and the Cold War was indeed a Chess game.
Problem is, we still have that mentality even though the enemy was dissolved nearly twenty years ago, and frankly, the world is getting fed up with it.
But, they have no right to. America is the way we are because of the same European nations that criticize us so much now. It worked like this:
They knew that Soviet Aggression had to be checked. However, they were still reeling from World War II and couldn't (or didn't want to) get involved. That is to say, they knew that if they stood idle, the United States wouldn't. And we didn't. And we still don't.
The Cold War affects today A LOT more then people give it credit for.
|
|
|
Post by Ceci on May 9, 2007 16:09:25 GMT -5
SS17, I am just checking in because I'm on a short break. But, I will be back later to address all of your comments. Right now, two things stood out to me that I'd like to answer now: I think what it boils down to is this: We have stacked our deck with Cold War politics and tactics and have not updated our political standing. [...] Problem is, we still have that mentality even though the enemy was dissolved nearly twenty years ago, and frankly, the world is getting fed up with it. Here, with both of these statements, I think you hit the nail on the head. There is a "Cold War" mentality that is still going on in the Bush White House. The reason why is the fact that there are so many left-overs from the Reagan era influencing the current Administration (Kissenger, Meese, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Goss, Gates, for example). Some of them have left, of course. But that doesn't mean that they haven't left their imprint on how foreign policy is done. Some of these dignitaries harken back to the Vietnam War. And if you take a close look, the Vietnam War era policy is also an influence on current dealings in the Middle East as well. One specific thing of Vietnam War policy is the fact that they will not show the American citizens an accurate body count, nor the coffins of soidiers in the news. During the Vietnam era, they did both of these things and had an overwhelming protestation from the American people during that time. However, what they didn't expect in this era was that citizens--fed up from these tactics--pretty much were affected in the same way. That in essence tells me that one could put out all the propaganda in the world to make people all "fuzzy" inside about the goals of the supposed war, but in the end war is hell and they know it. I'll have more to say later.
|
|
SeventhSeal17
Junior CNV Member
Featured CNV Contributor
Posts: 86
|
Post by SeventhSeal17 on May 9, 2007 17:01:50 GMT -5
Ok, I'll be around
|
|
|
Post by Ceci on May 9, 2007 21:34:01 GMT -5
Thanks for being patient. The other thing I wanted to say is the fact that America will have to change their tactics because of the "insurgency" that is happening in the Middle East. I think because guerilla warfare is occuring on the streets of Iraq, they have to realize that pretty quick that the old Cold War hawkish tactics won't work. I mean, in the news you heard it from the top brass overseeing operations in Iraq: they didn't know what they were expecting. So, again, I think that what you said is a precise interpretation of how things are going with our foreign policy.
|
|
SeventhSeal17
Junior CNV Member
Featured CNV Contributor
Posts: 86
|
Post by SeventhSeal17 on May 9, 2007 21:54:34 GMT -5
Exactly.
Couple that with the fact that the United States does not win guerrilla wars (Vietnam, anyone?), and we are in a world of trouble.
I come from a military family, so I get insider information in the training of our troops. One thing is certain, American troops are not trained for guerrilla or urban fighting. We are used to fighting conventional wars with conventional enemies who obey the Geneva Convention (or at least pretend they do). What we have here is an Iraqi running into a pre-school pumping four year olds full of lead to escape the Marines.
They know our Rules of Engagement, and they exploit them in their tactics.
Plus, all these weapons that we spend billions and billions of dollars on... useless.
That is to say, we could stick a Hellfire missile up the ass of a camel, but not if he is hiding in a cave. This is an infantry war, much like Vietnam. A man and his rifle.
Honestly, I'm just sick of seeing my fellow countrymen come home in body bags. This has to end.
|
|
|
Post by Ceci on May 9, 2007 22:14:13 GMT -5
Exactly. Couple that with the fact that the United States does not win guerrilla wars (Vietnam, anyone?), and we are in a world of trouble. Well, the U.S. still has the arrogance with the fire-power that makes them think they can win conventional wars. But one has to note when Pres. Bush stood up there and said "Mission Accomplished" on a battleship that his hubris did not prepare him for what was coming next. Again, this reminds me of plain old Colonialism in which the occupying country thinks that they have everything within their control. But, the American planners of warfare in Iraq forgot to note that colonized people do not take occupation very well. Just like in Vietnam, when people are subjugated by a far-removed, out-of-touch superpower, then they fight back. And you could say that the Iraqi are fighting for their freedom--but not in the ways that make America look good. Of course not. The military forgot to notice that not everything is run by how they interpret war. Sadly enough, the insurgents are making their own rules in terms of warfare. The first thing was not wearing identifiable uniforms. The second thing is not using the "sanctioned" arms that one uses in conventional wars. And the third thing is the intent and the emotion that with being subjugated by a foreign country with little or no interest in the occupied nation's culture. The thing that I've noticed is that the American military had to learn real quickly that their rules were not going to be followed--especially when the people of the occupied country notice how the Americans blatantly disregarded conventional rules themselves (torture, destroying national monuments, U.S. soldiers killing and raping innocent civilians). And when you are occupied and see the occupying nation not be brought up for charges for their wrongdoing, well, how else is one going to react? They rebel against the occupying country by all means necessary. And now, America is neck deep in its own quagmire. I know--especially when it comes down to suicide bombings. They gutted our entire surplus as well as ruined our own infrastructure just to fund the war overseas as well as the "War on Terror". And the soldiers are overtired with being in three or more tours. Especially when it is your friends, loved ones and the young people you know.
|
|