Chaos Overran Iraq Plan in ’06, Bush Team Says
By DAVID E. SANGER, MICHAEL R. GORDON and JOHN F. BURNS
Published: January 2, 2007
WASHINGTON, Dec. 31 — President Bush began 2006 assuring the country that he had a “strategy for victory in Iraq” He ended the year closeted with his war cabinet on his ranch trying to devise a new strategy, because the existing one had collapsed.
The original plan, championed by Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the top commander in Baghdad, and backed by Donald H. Rumsfeld, then the defense secretary, called for turning over responsibility for security to the Iraqis, shrinking the number of American bases and beginning the gradual withdrawal of American troops. But the plan collided with Iraq’s ferocious unraveling, which took most of Mr. Bush’s war council by surprise.
(Also of a surprise to Bush's "war council" were cellular phones and these new fangled com-put-ers.)
The whole thing leaves me with a whole range of questions the greatest of which is "who the fuck cares?"
It's long past the time anybody who occupied any position within this failed, joke of a presidency and who was able to influence policy should have one more pixel of print thrown at their attempt at covering their backside. The failures in Iraq are not in strategy but in policy. They have absolutely nothing to with whatever strategy Casey and other uniformed officers had to cobble together out of the impossible policy the President and his people put in place. Ultimately that's what the ISG concluded which is why Bush blew off their suggestions.
Iraq is George W. Bush's albatross.
5 comments:
I GNU it!
-Swinebread
I thought it was the fault of Americans for not believing in it enough.
No. They weren't clapping hard enough. That was what the problem was. That - and Cindy Sheehan. Like some sort evil succubus with the voice of Cindy Brady she sucked the life out of our will to fight.
I believe the enduring symbol of the Bush administration will be him standing on the deck of the aircraft carrier with the "Mission Accoplished sign in the background.
George Bush is like the negative image of Harry Truman. Not only does the buck not stop at Bush's desk, it doesn't even come in the vicinity of the White House. Every bad mistake he makes is someone else's fault.
George Bush is like the negative image of Harry Truman. Not only does the buck not stop at Bush's desk, it doesn't even come in the vicinity of the White House. Every bad mistake he makes is someone else's fault.
Yep but that rule is starting to run into conflict with the belief of conservatives that conservatism can never fail, it can only be failed. As Bush screws up they abandon him claiming he wasn't conservative enough.
Post a Comment