Wes Clark lays out Iraq plan

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Jac de Molay
Some of the ideas are good. Others, like "sealing" the iraq border and the ammo dumps, are unworkable

Oh bull****. Do you honestly think that with well over a hundred thousand troops in theater, we can't blow a hundred ****ing ammo dumps, and secure them until we can blow them?

Failure to do so as a first priority is one of the stupidest acts of the administration yet. "Gee, maybe there will be some evidence there of what we claimed we already knew, so let's not get around to those until we have time to look at every square inch"

We have ordnance disposal and CW handling units available in the US that haven't been called yet.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
For instance, Clark saying "We should recall the Iraqi Army to duty right now. If given good pay, good training, and solid background checks, Iraqi civilians can also help fill the intelligence and security gap."

Very agile-minded.
Like Bush hasn't been calling for this from the beginning.

If Bush has been calling for this, then why hasn't he dealt with the subordinates who have refused to carry out his orders? Or who is actually in charge up there?

Can you not find another dead horse to beat?
This one is unrecognizeable by now.

This is a very live horse, Tex. How many more will get zipped and shipped this month?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
first of the democrats to have a coherent plan.

that counts for something.

what Clark is saying in November:

"To guide the reconstruction of Iraq, we need a civilian from an allied country."

Joe Lieberman called for that in FEBRUARY!


http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...&notFound=true

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Azazel
some good stuff. some unworkable stuff.

yup.

[SlowwHand]

Michael, you spout the same rhetoric bull****.
You actually mean to sit there and say Bush hasn't been trying to get the Iraqi law enforement to take charge?
Again, that's bull****.
FINALLY, they are, to a degree.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


If Bush has been calling for this, then why hasn't he dealt with the subordinates who have refused to carry out his orders? Or who is actually in charge up there?

theyre calling up former members of the Iraqi army as INDIVIDUALS for the various forces in Iraq. They're NOT calling up units. Since the units dont exist. They fell apart during the initial attack.


see the following from a high level CPA official (formerly of the Clinton admin) on why retaining the Iraqi army was never possible.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2003Nov4.html

[SlowwHand]

Actually, you piss me off MUCH worse than Sava does.
Sava is just this side of brain-dead. He can't help it.

You, on the other hand, have said we need to stay until it's cleaned up; but no matter what happens, it's Bush's fault.
That's utter craola.

I tell you what, any respect I had for the Iraqi people is dying fast.
Sonsof*****es need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, and change their soiled panties.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Japher
Oerdin: when are you going to Monterey? If you ever have free time( yeah right) let me know, or if you want to go AWOL I can be there in an hour...

They changed stuff around on me last week and decided to send me to Iraq. Currently, I'm supposed to go to Fort Carson, Colorado for two weeks starting this Sunday then I'll be at Fort Hunter-Liggett, California until the 21st of December. I'm not sure how much free time I will have at either of those places. From what I understand the days will be pretty full.

Still, I'm going to keep updating this thread.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Actually, you piss me off MUCH worse than Sava does.
Sava is just this side of brain-dead. He can't help it.

You, on the other hand, have said we need to stay until it's cleaned up; but no matter what happens, it's Bush's fault.
That's utter craola.

I tell you what, any respect I had for the Iraqi people is dying fast.
Sonsof*****es need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, and change their soiled panties.

From HealingIraq, an Iraqi blog

"If you think that Iraqis aren't doing enough, then you're being mislead by your media. Thousands of people are applying to be members of IP, FPS, and the civil defense force. They are begging for the security to be in their hands. We know how to handle those scum. The Americans are more interested in being nice and all about human rights and free speech and stuff. We have our own Law and court systems which we can use but the CPA won't allow us to. They are being too lenient and forgiving on our expence. If you think that is what is required to build a successful democracy then you're too deluded. You don't know the first thing about the Iraqi society.

Iraqis are providing intelligence to the CPA hourly. Just ask the soldiers here. Iraqis are cooperating in every way they can. They're losing their lives for it goddammit. If you aren't seeing it on tv, it isn't my ****ing problem."

[Dinner]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Oh bull****. Do you honestly think that with well over a hundred thousand troops in theater, we can't blow a hundred ****ing ammo dumps, and secure them until we can blow them?

To be fair NPR is reporting that Iraq, which is around 1/10 the size of the US has approximately as much munitions as are in the entire US. We're talking about a place saturated in arms and ammunition. The UXO teams are blowing them up but, if the new reports are valid, at a pace which will take years to complete the job.

Bremer even got on NPR and admited that less then 25% of the ammo dumps have been secured. The rest just are sitting there waiting for people to pick them up and take them home.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
first of the democrats to have a coherent plan.

that counts for something.

Lieberman on reconstructing Iraq (from July)

[Q Classic]

huh. missed this. oh well.

second democrat to have a coherent plan. i guess that might count for something.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Michael, you spout the same rhetoric bull****.
You actually mean to sit there and say Bush hasn't been trying to get the Iraqi law enforement to take charge?
Again, that's bull****.
FINALLY, they are, to a degree.

To "take charge" of what? We sent 'em home without pay, then we decided that we wanted to train some of them to work with our units, under our authority, subject to our rules and terms and conditions.

Bush has done plenty of steppin and fetchin about how the Iraqis should assume responsibility (when we've determined their available means and authroity) for failures for which US is obligated as an occupying power under decades old international law. He sure as hell hasn't wanted them to "take charge" of anything, except if and when convenient to American interest, and in the manner and for the duration of convenience to American interests.

If we didn't want those responsibilities, then maybe we shouldn't have invaded and taken over their ****ing country in the first place.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Oerdin


To be fair NPR is reporting that Iraq, which is around 1/10 the size of the US has approximately as much munitions as are in the entire US. We're talking about a place saturated in arms and ammunition. The UXO teams are blowing them up but, if the new reports are valid, at a pace which will take years to complete the job.

Bremer even got on NPR and admited that less then 25% of the ammo dumps have been secured. The rest just are sitting there waiting for people to pick them up and take them home.

If they're out in the boonies, an F-16 and a couple of GBU's should do the trick. It's not like it's hard to blow the **** up. And considering what the *******s can do with it, don't you think it's a bit stupid to leave these sites sitting around unsecured? If you had to deploy another division of troops to secure them, deploy the ****ing division, rather than make this **** available to the goddamned enemy free for the taking.

[Dinner]

I agree we should have secured or destroyted them the moment they were found. However Bush's administration isn't know for long or even intermediate planning much less clear thinking. He bungled it but it probably would have been imp[ossible to secure all of the sights. Still, leaving 80% of the arms and munitions just sitting there unguarded and undestroyed is completely irresponsible.

Now would you like to hear something else irresponsible? Rumsfield announced that in the next few months the US is going to cut back it's forces in Iraq by 25%. Why would the US want to decrease the number of soldiers in Iraq so dramatically when by every report lawlessness and insecurity are the rule of the day? Why because the White House is worrying about next year's election and so they are afraid the constant bad news and body bags might dampen Bush Jr's reelection chances.

It is totally unacceptable, in my mind, that Bush can talk out of one side of his mouth about staying the course and increasing security while ordering large scale cut backs which directly controdict what he's say.