View Full Version : Gov. Report: "US ‘had no policy’ in place to rebuild Iraq"
the Talking Can
10-31-2005, 05:33 AM
US ‘had no policy’ in place to rebuild Iraq
By Stephanie Kirchgaessner in Washington
Published: October 30 2005 21:01 | Last updated: October 30 2005 23:47
US troops in Iraq
The US government had “no comprehensive policy or regulatory guidelines” in place for staffing the management of postwar Iraq, according to the top government watchdog overseeing the country’s reconstruction.
The lack of planning had plagued reconstruction since the US-led invasion, and been exacerbated by a “general lack of co-ordination” between US government agencies charged with the rebuilding of Iraq, said Stuart Bowen, the special inspector-general for Iraq reconstruction, in a report released on Sunday.
His 110-page quarterly report, delivered to Congress at the weekend, has underscored how a “reconstruction gap” is emerging that threatens to leave many projects planned by the US on the drawing board.
“Nearly two years ago, the US developed a reconstruction plan that specified a target number of projects that would be executed using the Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund.
“That number was revised downward [last year]. Now it appears that the actual number of projects completed will be even lower,” Mr Bowen says in his report.
Increasing security costs were “the most salient” reason behind the shortfall, he concluded.
While 93 per cent of the nearly $30bn (€25bn, £17bn) the US has appropriated for reconstruction has been committed to programmes and projects, more than 25 per cent of the funds have been spent on security costs related to the insurgency....
link link (http://news.ft.com/cms/s/1005fd16-4984-11da-8686-0000779e2340,_i_rssPage=80fdaff6-cbe5-11d7-81c6-0820abe49a01.html)
Ugly Duck
10-31-2005, 07:32 AM
Before the invasion, American military commanders told the Cabal that it would take at least 300,000 troops to control post-invasion Iraq. The Pack of Liars said "nope," ordered in 260,00 for the lightning-strike invasion, then reduced from there for the occupation. We all saw what happened. The American military command was right, the Bush Crime Family was wrong. Again.
Adept Havelock
10-31-2005, 09:28 PM
For an example of what we could have done in Iraq if we had been so inclined, do some reading up on post-war Japan. I highly recommend the MacArthur Biography "American Caesar" by Wiliam Manchester.
When we went in to rebuild Japan, we had people who had spent their lives studying the language, culture, and people. They were intimately involved in the post-war planning, occupation, and rebuilding. Of course, we provided the raw materials, and used largely native companies and workers in the rebuilding effort which gave the populace something to do, and someway to live. It actually worked out that rather than letting US companies take all the Marshall Plan funds, the overwhelming majority actually went to the rebuilding nations.
What could have been in Iraq........if only we had been so inclined.
Logical
10-31-2005, 10:15 PM
Shocking, simply shocking, no seriously it is shameful.
Taco John
10-31-2005, 10:39 PM
Come on. Bush is on a roll!
http://www.allhatnocattle.net/bush%20lays%20an%20egg.JPG
Taco John
10-31-2005, 10:41 PM
Oh wait. That's Bush laying an egg.
For an example of what we could have done in Iraq if we had been so inclined, do some reading up on post-war Japan. I highly recommend the MacArthur Biography "American Caesar" by Wiliam Manchester.
When we went in to rebuild Japan, we had people who had spent their lives studying the language, culture, and people. They were intimately involved in the post-war planning, occupation, and rebuilding. Of course, we provided the raw materials, and used largely native companies and workers in the rebuilding effort which gave the populace something to do, and someway to live. It actually worked out that rather than letting US companies take all the Marshall Plan funds, the overwhelming majority actually went to the rebuilding nations.
What could have been in Iraq........if only we had been so inclined.
if only the population of iraq were a culture even remotely like
japan's...
:hmmm:
Ugly Duck
11-01-2005, 12:03 AM
While 93 per cent of the nearly $30bn (€25bn, £17bn) the US has appropriated for reconstruction has been committed to programmes and projects, more than 25 per cent of the funds have been spent on security costs related to the insurgency....This is Bushron's "privatization" plan. Shovel our tax money over to private corporations and just hope for the best cuz they can't track what happens to it. Billions and billions go to private security guards but nothing gets built. The money is down the tubes and into the bank accounts of folks that say they will rebuild something, but need more security. Everybody is pocketing our money but they ain't doing much.
Adept Havelock
11-01-2005, 09:25 AM
if only the population of iraq were a culture even remotely like
japan's...
:hmmm:
Yep, if only the population of iraq was an ancient culture with a strong warrior tradition, steeped in the brutal code of Bushido. No similarities between Kamikazes and suicide bombers, Eh? :hmmm:
I guess it was that history of democracy that Japan had that made the difference. Oh, wait. Japan was a thousand-year old Autrocratic system dominated by their military.
What could have been...if only we had been so inclined. :cuss: for the wasted opportunities.
Area 51
11-01-2005, 09:43 AM
Hindsight seems to be 20/20 around here.
Pitt Gorilla
11-01-2005, 09:52 AM
Hindsight seems to be 20/20 around here.Translation: You expected us to get it right?
Taco John
11-01-2005, 09:56 AM
if only the population of iraq were a culture even remotely like
japan's...
:hmmm:
This is amuzing. Culture is like a weight around the Republican's neck in this country, and this Republican poster wants us to believe that if only this culture were as advanced as Japan's, we'd be so much better off. Of course, say nothing about the people on the other side of the debate who have made the argument that the Iraqis may not be culturally ready for democracy given their views on caste, women, and non-religious folks. But try to bring that up and you get people like Baby Lee calling you racist.
What a bunch of dopes.
Chief Faithful
11-01-2005, 09:58 AM
Translation: You expected us to get it right?
What is "right"?
patteeu
11-01-2005, 10:06 AM
Yep, if only the population of iraq was an ancient culture with a strong warrior tradition, steeped in the brutal code of Bushido. No similarities between Kamikazes and suicide bombers, Eh? :hmmm:
I guess it was that history of democracy that Japan had that made the difference. Oh, wait. Japan was a thousand-year old Autrocratic system dominated by their military.
What could have been...if only we had been so inclined. :cuss: for the wasted opportunities.
One big difference is that the entire nation of Japan lost a war convincingly including the near total destruction of two of their cities. Iraq's citizens suffered, but they didn't experience the total defeat that Japan did. They didn't have the fight sufficiently knocked out of them. If only we were a little more like the Golden Horde... ;)
Area 51
11-01-2005, 10:08 AM
Translation: You expected us to get it right?
You seem to have a problem grasping the obvious.
Adept Havelock
11-01-2005, 10:24 AM
One big difference is that the entire nation of Japan lost a war convincingly including the near total destruction of two of their cities. Iraq's citizens suffered, but they didn't experience the total defeat that Japan did. They didn't have the fight sufficiently knocked out of them. If only we were a little more like the Golden Horde... ;)
Maybe it's me, but I can't see watching Tanks belonging to a foriegn power running down my capital's avenues as anything other than a total defeat. Hell, the Iraqi's with power and a sat dish could watch it happen live! :thumb:
patteeu
11-01-2005, 10:30 AM
Maybe it's me, but I can't see watching Tanks belonging to a foriegn power running down my capital's avenues as anything other than a total defeat. Hell, the Iraqi's with power and a sat dish could watch it happen live! :thumb:
I think it might just be you. The japanese were extremely nationalistic and proud of their country. Many of the Iraqis were glad to see Saddam's regime toppled. Where were the Iraq Hiroshimas and Nagasakis? A tank running down my capital's avenues doesn't move me as much as the loss of an empire followed by two unprecedented nuclear blasts and my emporer's unconditional surrender.
Chief Faithful
11-01-2005, 10:42 AM
The US government had “no comprehensive policy or regulatory guidelines” in place for staffing the management of postwar Iraq, according to the top government watchdog overseeing the country’s reconstruction.
The lack of planning had plagued reconstruction since the US-led invasion, and been exacerbated by a “general lack of co-ordination” between US government agencies charged with the rebuilding of Iraq, said Stuart Bowen, the special inspector-general for Iraq reconstruction, in a report released on Sunday.
Name one war were any country had a comprehensive policy that did not need to be altered or changed to fit the situation. No plan is perfect, no war is perfectly executed, and no perfect post war policy has ever been preplanned. Even the Marshall plan did not develop until after the surrender of Germany and Japan.
This article is nothing more than a loud individual with a stupid opinion. We all know there was a postwar plan for Iraq, but like every war since the history of man things did not go perfectly to plan. Thus, the plan evolves to fit the situation.
The unfounded Bush Bashing that takes place daily on the opinion pages of our news papers in this country is just astounding stupidity. This article is just another example.
Adept Havelock
11-01-2005, 11:09 AM
The US government had “no comprehensive policy or regulatory guidelines” in place for staffing the management of postwar Iraq, according to the top government watchdog overseeing the country’s reconstruction.
The lack of planning had plagued reconstruction since the US-led invasion, and been exacerbated by a “general lack of co-ordination” between US government agencies charged with the rebuilding of Iraq, said Stuart Bowen, the special inspector-general for Iraq reconstruction, in a report released on Sunday.
Name one war were any country had a comprehensive policy that did not need to be altered or changed to fit the situation. No plan is perfect, no war is perfectly executed, and no perfect post war policy has ever been preplanned. Even the Marshall plan did not develop until after the surrender of Germany and Japan.
This article is nothing more than a loud individual with a stupid opinion. We all know there was a postwar plan for Iraq, but like every war since the history of man things did not go perfectly to plan. Thus, the plan evolves to fit the situation.
The unfounded Bush Bashing that takes place daily on the opinion pages of our news papers in this country is just astounding stupidity. This article is just another example.
If you think there was no difference between the massive national effort that was the Marshall plan and the administrations lack of planning for post-war Iraq you need to study history a bit more, without your ideological blinders. I'd really appreciate a link to something that proves your statement that there was no set up for the Marshall Plan until after Aug. of 1945. Please. There was long-term planning for the post war environment. We set up the 1944 D-Day invasion zones based on the postwar occupation plans back in 1942-1943 (So that the British and American Armies wouldn't have to worry about crossing the supply line of entire army groups). That dog not only doesn't hunt, it can't even go into the woods without wetting itself.
I'd be just as pissed and strident at the mismangement and wasted opportunities regardless of which party inflicted this idiocy on our troops. Can you say the same? Your comments about criticism equalling "unfounded bush-bashing" lead me to seriously doubt it.
I think your more concerned about the fact that it was "your guy" who was in charge when we dropped the ball on the post war planning, than the fact that the ball was dropped in the first place. JMO.
BTW- That's a nice strawman argument you started your post with. No one is saying that plans should be perfect. I'm only suggesting they should be exist in the first place. Iraq has been a make-it-up as we go along effort, at least according to those I know that have been over in the sandbox.
Chief Faithful
11-01-2005, 11:36 AM
If you think there was no difference between the massive national effort that was the Marshall plan and the administrations lack of planning for post-war Iraq you need to study history a bit more, without your ideological blinders. I'd really appreciate a link to something that proves your statement that there was no set up for the Marshall Plan until after Aug. of 1945. Please. There was long-term planning for the post war environment. We set up the 1944 D-Day invasion zones based on the postwar occupation plans back in 1942-1943 (So that the British and American Armies wouldn't have to worry about crossing the supply line of entire army groups). That dog not only doesn't hunt, it can't even go into the woods without wetting itself.
I'd be just as pissed and strident at the mismangement and wasted opportunities regardless of which party inflicted this idiocy on our troops. Can you say the same? Your comments about criticism equalling "unfounded bush-bashing" lead me to seriously doubt it.
I think your more concerned about the fact that it was "your guy" who was in charge when we dropped the ball on the post war planning, than the fact that the ball was dropped in the first place. JMO.
BTW- Nice strawman you started your post with. No one is saying that plans should be perfect. I'm only suggesting they should be exist in the first place. Iraq has been a make-it-up as we go along effort, at least according to those I know that have been over in the sandbox.
I think you should check your history before you post. Marshall announced his plan in June 1947 and it was in response to the threat of communism (Truman Doctrine) not because it was part of a comprehensive post war strategy developed before D-Day.
Key Dates for the Marshall Plan (http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/marshall/mars.html)
Second, are you proposing that the D-Day invasion, while successful, went perfectly? What about landings in the wrong locations, what about Airborne not being dropped in the right locations, what about the hedge rows that re-defined the whole battle? There is no such thing as a perfect plan.
People who are bashing the President because he had no comprehensive post war plan pre-war are the people with blinders. We all know there was a post war plan, but it had to be altered and evolved to fit the situation.
The loud mouthed opinion columnist you are defending is the biased idiot and you are the moron for falling into her trap.
Baby Lee
11-01-2005, 12:31 PM
But try to bring that up and you get people like Baby Lee calling you racist.
1. Scooped a little beachfront into yer panties at the clambake, didja?
2. Didn't call you racist. Don't call people racist. Just pointed out the racial and ethnic prejudices of the POSITION.
Area 51
11-01-2005, 12:40 PM
1. Scooped a little beachfront into yer panties at the clambake, didja?
2. Didn't call you racist. Don't call people racist. Just pointed out the racial and ethnic prejudices of the POSITION.
You might not have called him a racist, but you would probably have been correct if you had. He has said some pretty unflattering things about minorities.
Baby Lee
11-01-2005, 12:46 PM
You might not have called him a racist, but you would probably have been correct if you had. He has said some pretty unflattering things about minorities.
It's not about him. It's about my conception of the proper use of the word. I'm more interested in pointing out prejudicial aspects of positions taken, than haphazardly extending it into a definitional trait of the person taking said position.
Yep, if only the population of iraq was an ancient culture with a strong warrior tradition, steeped in the brutal code of Bushido. No similarities between Kamikazes and suicide bombers, Eh? :hmmm:
I guess it was that history of democracy that Japan had that made the difference. Oh, wait. Japan was a thousand-year old Autrocratic system dominated by their military.
What could have been...if only we had been so inclined. :cuss: for the wasted opportunities.
jettio??
anyways, not all responses to your posts are argumentive. i was trying to
ride your "what if" scenario. just found some cultural differences...
This is amuzing. Culture is like a weight around the Republican's neck in this country, and this Republican poster wants us to believe that if only this culture were as advanced as Japan's, we'd be so much better off. Of course, say nothing about the people on the other side of the debate who have made the argument that the Iraqis may not be culturally ready for democracy given their views on caste, women, and non-religious folks. But try to bring that up and you get people like Baby Lee calling you racist.
What a bunch of dopes.
this "republican poster" urges you to get over yourself. you constantly
talk about spin as you totally put words in my mouth as well as labeling
me a hardcore party man.
great assumptions sherlock :loser:
you sir, are the dope.
ps: you also spelled 'amusing' wrong.
The US government had “no comprehensive policy or regulatory guidelines” in place for staffing the management of postwar Iraq, according to the top government watchdog overseeing the country’s reconstruction.
The lack of planning had plagued reconstruction since the US-led invasion, and been exacerbated by a “general lack of co-ordination” between US government agencies charged with the rebuilding of Iraq, said Stuart Bowen, the special inspector-general for Iraq reconstruction, in a report released on Sunday.
Name one war were any country had a comprehensive policy that did not need to be altered or changed to fit the situation. No plan is perfect, no war is perfectly executed, and no perfect post war policy has ever been preplanned. Even the Marshall plan did not develop until after the surrender of Germany and Japan.
This article is nothing more than a loud individual with a stupid opinion. We all know there was a postwar plan for Iraq, but like every war since the history of man things did not go perfectly to plan. Thus, the plan evolves to fit the situation.
The unfounded Bush Bashing that takes place daily on the opinion pages of our news papers in this country is just astounding stupidity. This article is just another example.
nice.
go bowe
11-01-2005, 10:05 PM
is it bush bashing to say that there doesn't seem to have been a comprehensive plan that adequately dealt with reasonably expected outcomes of the war?
shouldn't such a plan have been the product of several different civilian agencies and departments and the military rather than something that the president himself was supposed to come up with?
the department of state screwed up pretty well when they decided to disband the iraqi army and police and totally debathistfy the government...
the military screwed up pretty well when they didn't have the resources or even the plans to protect vital assets from widespread looting...
every department involved screwed up the post war situation pretty well...
if there was a plan, it was unbelievably wrong in many instances...
and that is the fault of the professional bureaucrats as much as it is the fault of the policy makers...
criticizing obvious mistakes of commission (or in this case, omission) with regard to the post war plan (or lack thereof), does not necessarily equate to bush bashing...
Logical
11-01-2005, 10:20 PM
is it bush bashing to say that there doesn't seem to have been a comprehensive plan that adequately dealt with reasonably expected outcomes of the war?...Yes
shouldn't such a plan have been the product of several different civilian agencies and departments and the military rather than something that the president himself was supposed to come up with?...[/QUOTE]Absolutely
the department of state screwed up pretty well when they decided to disband the iraqi army and police and totally debathistfy the government...Pretty much
the military screwed up pretty well when they didn't have the resources or even the plans to protect vital assets from widespread looting
every department involved screwed up the post war situation pretty well...
if there was a plan, it was unbelievably wrong in many instances...
and that is the fault of the professional bureaucrats as much as it is the fault of the policy makers...Yup
criticizing obvious mistakes of commission (or in this case, omission) with regard to the post war plan (or lack thereof), does not necessarily equate to bush bashing...While I agree with your point, in my case I am Bush bashing for not rolling heads for all that not occuring.
go bowe
11-01-2005, 10:30 PM
actually, i do feel like bashing him for not putting capable people in important positions...
and for not allowing established procedures to run their course and develop realistic plans for reasonably foreseeable contingencies before the occupation took place...
so, in this instance, i guess i'm bureacrat-bashing and bush-bashing, a little at least...
it could have been handled much better than it was, imo...
vBulletin® v3.8.0, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.