The Iraq War That Might Have Been

[Wehrwolfen]

Ten years on, newly published secret documents shed new light on potential turning points the United States missed.​

BY MICHAEL R. GORDON, BERNARD E. TRAINOR
MARCH 12, 2013


(snip)

TEAM OF RIVALS​

When President Barack Obama took office, he was faced with the challenge of shrinking the American military commitment to Iraq while encouraging the evolution of a stable Iraq. The task was complicated by the March 2010 parliamentary elections. The Iraqiya coalition led by Ayad Allawi, Maliki's principal rival, had won the most seats in the voting. But with the help of a convenient ruling from the Iraqi judiciary, Maliki was moving to assemble the biggest coalition and had no intention of vacating the premiership.

The solution favored by Vice President Joseph Biden, who had the lead on Iraqi policy for the administration, was to get all of the Iraqis players into the tent. There were two approaches. One was to persuade Jalal Talabani, Iraq's president, to resign, so that Allawi would take his place. Despite a phone call from President Obama himself, Talabani demurred.

The other was to rework the structure of the Iraqi government and establish a new power-sharing arrangement. It would be like a reverse game of musical chairs: Since they were more claimants for the top posts than positions, the United States would add another chair. Christopher Hill, the Obama administration's first ambassador in Baghdad, was a strong advocate of this approach, which he thought might be loosely modeled after the legislation the United States had adopted in 1947 that created the National Security Council, the Defense Department, and the CIA.

The plan was outlined in an American "non-paper," a diplomatic initiative that bore no official markings so it could be disowned if he leaked. A "Coordinating Council on National Strategic Policy" would be established to review national security issues. The panel would be headed by a secretary-general for national security affairs, a post that it was assumed would go to Allawi, and would also include the prime minister, the president, the parliamentary speaker, and other ranking officials.

But like the Obama administration's plan to replace Talabani, the scheme came to naught. Maliki and Allawi could never agree on the powers of the new body. And with the White House's focus on withdrawing troops, the American plan faded from view, leaving Iraqi politics as fractured as ever.

By 2013, the moderate Sunni who served as finance minister had left the Maliki government and the prime minister was as powerful as before.

Meanwhile, the civil war raging next door in Syria was creating new challenges as Iran began to fly military supplies to Damascus through Iraqi airspace. Fearful of what a Sunni-dominated Syria might mean for Iraq, Maliki was apprehensive about the possibility of Bashar al-Assad's overthrow, while Sunnis and Kurds in Iraq sided with the Syrian opposition.

The Iraq war was officially over. But a new phase in the struggle for power in the region had begun.


Read more:
The Iraq War That Might Have Been - By Michael R. Gordon and Bernard E. Trainor | Foreign Policy

 

[Oldguy]

The Iraqi war that might have been is squarely laid at the feet of Donald Rumsfeld and George Bush.

Barack Obama inherited a tangled, confused mess and has done the best he could with what he was handed.

Do you agree, or disagree? Why?

 

[waltky]

Sectarian violence to blame - not coalition forces...

Iraq sees highest monthly death toll in 5 years
Aug. 1,`13 — More than 1,000 people were killed in Iraq in July, the highest monthly death toll in five years, the U.N. said Thursday, a grim figure that shows rapidly deteriorating security as sectarian tensions soar nearly two years after U.S. troops withdrew from the country.

Violence has been on the rise all year, but the number of attacks against civilians and security forces has spiked during the Islamic holy month of Ramadan, which began early last month. The increased bloodshed has intensified fears that Iraq is on a path back to the widespread chaos that nearly tore the country apart in the aftermath of the U.S.-led invasion that ousted Saddam Hussein in 2003. Months of rallies by Iraq's minority Sunnis against the Shiite-led government over what they contend is second-class treatment and the unfair use of tough anti-terrorism measures against their sect set the stage for the violence.

The killings significantly picked up after Iraqi security forces launched a heavy-handed crackdown on a Sunni protest camp in the northern town of Hawija on April 23. A ferocious backlash followed the raid, with deadly bomb attacks and sporadic gunbattles between insurgents and soldiers — this time members of the Iraqi security forces rather than U.S. troops. The U.N. Mission in Iraq said 1,057 Iraqis were killed and 2,326 wounded in July, the highest toll since June 2008 when 975 people were killed.

People and security forces inspect the site of a car bomb explosion in Basra, 340 miles (550 kilometers) southeast of Baghdad, Iraq. The U.N. mission in Iraq says more than 1,000 people have been killed in violence across the country in July, the highest monthly death toll in years.

The increase was particularly troubling because the numbers had begun declining five years ago following a series of U.S.-led offensives and a Sunni revolt against al-Qaida in Iraq. "We haven't seen such numbers in more than five years, when the blind rage of sectarian strife that inflicted such deep wounds upon this country was finally abating. I reiterate my urgent call on Iraq's political leaders to take immediate and decisive action to stop the senseless bloodshed, and to prevent these dark days from returning," acting U.N. envoy to Iraq, Gyorgy Busztin, said in a statement. The U.N. said that 928 of those killed in July were civilians and 129 were Iraqi security forces.

In all, 4,137 civilians have been killed, mostly in Baghdad, and 9,865 wounded so far this year, according to the statement. That was up from 1,684 killed in the January-July period last year. Al-Qaida in Iraq has claimed responsibility for many of the suicide attacks and car bombings in recent days as it seeks to stoke sectarian hatred and undermine Iraq's Shiite-led government. Much of the violence is targeting Shiites who have held the reins of power since Saddam's Sunni-dominated regime was ousted. An interior ministry official attributed the recent uptick in the death toll figures to a change in tactics by insurgents who are now trying to attack crowded, soft civilian targets such as cafes, mosques and markets in order to kill as many people as possible.

More Iraq sees highest monthly death toll in 5 years

 

[waltky]

Can't blame American forces for this one...

UN: Nearly 1,000 Iraqis killed in September
October 1, 2013 — An Iraqi sheik carried his infant grandson's tightly wrapped body, staring ahead with a blank gaze as men behind him bore the coffin of the baby's mother during their funeral Tuesday, a day after they were killed in a wave of bombings in Baghdad.

The heartbreaking image, captured in an Associated Press photo, illustrates the human tragedy behind the numbers as the death toll mounts to levels not seen in half a decade amid a new surge in sectarian bloodshed nearly two years after the U.S. withdrew from the country. The U.N. mission in Iraq said Tuesday that 979 people died in September, most civilians caught up in the violence by insurgents led by al-Qaida in Iraq who appear determined to rekindle the tensions between Sunnis and Shiites that nearly pushed the country to the brink of civil war in 2006-2007. Iraq is going through its worst surge in violence since 2008, with near-daily attacks and relentless bombings blamed on hard-line Sunni insurgents. The surge followed a deadly crackdown by the Shiite-led government on a Sunni protest camp in northern Iraq in April.

September's toll pushed the total number of people killed since April to more than 5,000. Among the dead last month were 887 civilians while the rest were security forces. The figure was slightly lower than the death toll in July, which was the highest since 2008 at 1,057, but underscored the rising violence after a long period of relative calm. The report said the worst-affected part was the capital, Baghdad, where 418 people were killed in September. It said 2,133 people were wounded in last month's violence.

Mahmoud Abdel Rahman carries the dead body of his eleven-month old grandson, Latif, who was killed along with his mother on Monday when their house collapsed in a car bomb attack, while mourners carry the coffin of the mother, Hasnah Abdel Rasul, during their funeral in the Shiite holy city of Najaf, 100 miles (160 kilometers) south of Baghdad, Iraq, Tuesday, Oct. 1, 2013. Al-Qaida's local franchise in Iraq has claimed responsibility for carrying out a deadly string of car bombings in Baghdad.

The U.N. representative in Baghdad said the report raised a stark alarm and called on Iraq's political rivals to come together. "As terrorists continue to target Iraqis indiscriminately, I call upon all political leaders to strengthen their efforts to promote national dialogue and reconciliation," Nickolay Mladenov was quoted as saying in the report. "Political, religious and civil leaders as well as the security services must work together to end the bloodshed and ensure that all Iraqi citizens feel equally protected." Hours earlier, al-Qaida's local franchise in Iraq claimed responsibility for Monday's string of car bombings that mostly targeted Shiite neighborhoods in Baghdad, killing 55 people. Sheik Mahmoud Abdel Rahman's grandson, Latif, and the baby's mother Hasnah Abdel Rasul, were among those killed in the wave of violence.

The baby was wrapped in a shroud with verses from Islam's holy book the Quran as Abdel Rahman carried it in a procession as his two loved ones were buried in the Shiite holy city of Najaf. The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant said the attacks were in retaliation to the "arrests, torturing and targeting of Sunnis" by the Shiite-led government and vowed more attacks. "To Sunnis we say: The Islamic State, God willing, knows where, when and how to attack," the statement said. "The Mujahideen will not stay motionless." The al-Qaida statement's authenticity could not be independently confirmed but it was posted on a website commonly used by militants and its style was consistent with earlier statements by the terror network. Attacks continued on Tuesday, killing at least six people.

MORE

See also:

Rare terrorist attack in peaceful Kurdish region of Iraq kills 6
September 29, 2013 — Multiple suicide bombers struck the capital of Iraq’s semi-autonomous Kurdish region Sunday, killing six and injuring dozens of others, according to a security official. It was the first major attack to hit what is known as Iraqi Kurdistan in years, stunning residents of the normally peaceful region.

The complex attack occurred outside the headquarters of the Kurdish secret police, known as the Asayish, around 1:30 p.m. local time in Irbil, capital of the three-province Kurdish area, according to a statement from the Asayish. A mini-bus drove to the building’s gate and detonated after coming under fire from guards. Then, four attackers on foot and strapped with explosives opened fire on guards, who returned fire, killing all of them, according to the security official. At least one blew himself up. After emergency workers arrived, an ambulance packed with explosives drove to the gate and detonated, according to the Asayish statement. The Kurdistan regional government Health Ministry denied any of its ambulances were used.

Six people were killed and 62 injured, according to Kurdistan's health minister, and security officers and health workers were among the dead. After the bombing, all roads into Irbil were closed as authorities searched for additional bombs. They advised those in the city to stay away from public places, major roads and government buildings. Iraqi Kurdistan is an autonomous region bordering Turkey, Iran and Syria, with its own president, parliament, and army, known as the Peshmerga.

The Syrian civil war is raging just over the Kurdistan border, with Kurdish militias seeing heavy fighting against Islamist rebels, including the al-Qaida-linked al-Nusra Front and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, which has a long history of terrorist attacks in Iraq. More than 200,000 Syrian refugees have crossed into Iraq’s Kurdish provinces, and Iraqi Kurdish President Massoud Barzani has warned his military could intervene if Syrian Kurds are not protected. Authorities would not say if they suspected the bombing was connected to Syria. The attack comes just over a week after regional elections, which saw the ruling Kurdistan Democratic Party hold onto power. The border to Syria was closed for more than two weeks around the election, only re-opening Sunday.

Iraqi Kurdistan has long been considered the safest region of Iraq, garnering significant foreign investment and even some tourism. Benefitting from a U.S.-enforced no-fly zone after the first Gulf War and seeing almost no fighting during the most recent war in Iraq, it has been an oasis of stability, in stark contract to Baghdad and other areas of Iraq, which have been rocked by a spate of deadly attacks in recent weeks and have seen rising levels of violence over the past year. Before Sunday, the last attack in Irbil was a truck bombing in 2007 that killed 15 people. That was the first major attack in the city since June 2005. The last major attack in Iraqi Kurdistan was a suicide bomb at a hotel in the city of Sulaymaniyah in 2008 that killed one person and injuring 29.

Rare terrorist attack in peaceful Kurdish region of Iraq kills 6 - Middle East - Stripes

 

[waltky]

Sectarian violence heating up in Iraq again...

10 killed, 22 wounded in violent attacks in Iraq
2013-12-30 -- At least 10 people were killed and 22 others wounded in violent attacks in Iraq on Sunday, including a suicide bombing against a military target, police said.

A suicide car bomber attacked an Iraqi army checkpoint in Suez intersection east of Mosul, some 400 km north of Baghdad, killing seven people and injuring 11 others, a police source told Xinhua on condition of anonymity. Three army officers, including a battalion commander, and four soldiers were killed in the attack, while seven soldiers and four civilians were wounded, the police source said.

Earlier in the day, at least three people were killed and 11 others wounded in two violent attacks in central Iraq, a police source said. In one of the attacks, two government-backed Sahwa paramilitary group members were killed and five others wounded when gunmen attacked their checkpoint in Abu Ghraib area, some 25 km west of Baghdad, the source told Xinhua on condition of anonymity.

The Sahwa militia, also known as the Awakening Council or the Sons of Iraq, consists of armed groups, including some powerful anti-U.S. Sunni insurgent groups, who turned their rifles against the al-Qaida network after the latter exercised indiscriminate killings against both Shiite and Sunni Muslim communities. In a separate incident, a civilian was killed and six others were wounded when a roadside bomb went off in Jihad district in the southwestern of the capital, the source said.

Iraq is witnessing its worst violence in recent years. According to the UN Assistance Mission for Iraq, 8,109 Iraqis, including 952 members of Iraqi security forces, were killed in the country from January to November this year.

10 killed, 22 wounded in violent attacks in Iraq - Xinhua | English.news.cn

See also:

U.S. rushes to bolster Iraq with drones and missiles in fight against militants

 

[g5000]

Bush demobilized the Iraqi Army after the invasion, and that is the only "turning point" that matters.

It will go down as one of the biggest military blunders of all time.

 

[Pete7469]

The Iraqi war that might have been is squarely laid at the feet of Donald Rumsfeld and George Bush.

Barack Obama inherited a tangled, confused mess and has done the best he could with what he was handed.

Do you agree, or disagree? Why?

Bullshit.

The Iraq War was waged with incredible international assistance. The whole world wanted the Iraq issue settled once and for all. 12 years of dicking around with feckless UN inspectors and insipid diplomats, along with 2 bombing campaigns by Clinton had not solved the problem Saddam Hussein's totalitarian regime presented.

A global Islamic insurgency was a separate issue, but rolling into their front yard, setting up a flag and daring those bearded sociopaths to fuck with us was a good strategy. It was a huge investment, but we killed 1000's of the most dedicated jihadist assholes who came from all over the world.

Then we ended up with a moonbat messiah who's loyalty is clearly not to the US, our traditions, or the Constitution. Your moonbat messiah didn't "inherit a tangled, confused mess", he demanded control over it and solicited a billion dollars in campaign. He fought for it, told the country to fight on his behalf so he could fix everything. He wanted the job, he wanted the responsibility, or so we thought.

As soon as the sound bytes and talking points were organized we were told our expectations were too high. That was immediately after the zombie apocalypse of Nov 2008. So don't give me any bullshit about how he "didn't know how bad things were". He knew damn well he couldn't wipe his own ass without help, but found out his aides can't even wipe their own asses either.

It's incredible that there are people still trying to make excuses for this asshole.

 

[g5000]

Fateful Choice on Iraq Army Bypassed Debate

When President Bush convened a meeting of his National Security Council on May 22, 2003, his special envoy in Iraq made a statement that caught many of the participants by surprise. In a video presentation from Baghdad, L. Paul Bremer III informed the president and his aides that he was about to issue an order formally dissolving Iraq’s Army.

The decree was issued the next day.

But with the fifth anniversary of the start of the war approaching, some participants have provided in interviews their first detailed, on-the-record accounts of a decision that is widely seen as one of the most momentous and contentious of the war, assailed by critics as all but ensuring that American forces would face a growing insurgency led by embittered Sunnis who led much of the army.

The account that emerges from those interviews, and from access to previously unpublished documents, makes clear that Mr. Bremer’s decree reversed an earlier plan — one that would have relied on the Iraqi military to help secure and rebuild the country, and had been approved at a White House meeting that Mr. Bush convened just 10 weeks earlier.

The interviews show that while Mr. Bush endorsed Mr. Bremer’s plan in the May 22 meeting, the decision was made without thorough consultations within government, and without the counsel of the secretary of state or the senior American commander in Iraq, said the commander, Lt. Gen. David D. McKiernan.

When Mr. Bush convened his top national security aides before the March 2003 invasion, he was presented with a clear American plan on what to do with the Iraqi armed forces. American commanders and Jay Garner, the retired lieutenant general who served as the first American administrator in Iraq, planned to use the Iraqi military to help protect the country and as a national reconstruction force.

The plan was outlined in a PowerPoint presentation that Douglas J. Feith, a senior aide to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, gave at a National Security Council meeting that Mr. Bush convened on March 12, eight days before the invasion began. Republican Guard units, the forces deemed most loyal to Mr. Hussein, were to be disarmed, detained and dismantled.

But the rest of the army would be retained. Three to five of the divisions would be used to form the “nucleus” of a new Iraqi Army, according to a copy of the PowerPoint slide, which was obtained by The New York Times. Other Iraqi troops would be used as a reconstruction force to rebuild the nation.

The presentation also carried a caution about the risks of dismissing the army in the early months of an American occupation in a nation racked by high unemployment: “Cannot immediately demobilize 250K-300K personnel and put on the street.”

Bush bungled it. He's an idiot who cost us thousands of American lives unnecessarily.

 

[deltex1]

The Iraqi war that might have been is squarely laid at the feet of Donald Rumsfeld and George Bush.

Barack Obama inherited a tangled, confused mess and has done the best he could with what he was handed.

Do you agree, or disagree? Why?

Obabble was handed a win...however ugly..and abandoned it into a loss.

 

[rdean]

With Republicans in charge, the Iraq fiasco could never be more than a debacle. Remember when McCain said Saddam and his enemy Bin Laden were working together and had to be corrected ON CAMERA? Remember, Republicans don't believe in education and rewrite history. When you do that, you don't know anything. And all of their policies are failures. All of them. How could you make a mistake the war cost 200 billion and ended up costing 6 trillion? How is that possible?

Tell me. How can you go from 200 billion and "Mission Accomplished" to 6 trillion???? This is past incompetence well into treason and just plain fucking stupid. And Republicans still defend this disgrace.

 

[rdean]

The Iraqi war that might have been is squarely laid at the feet of Donald Rumsfeld and George Bush.

Barack Obama inherited a tangled, confused mess and has done the best he could with what he was handed.

Do you agree, or disagree? Why?

Obabble was handed a win...however ugly..and abandoned it into a loss.

Two thirds of the Christian population was either crucified or chased from their homeland and their churches bombed.

Tens of thousands of Americans either dead or maimed for life.

And the war went from 200 billion and "Mission Accomplished" to 6 trillion.

Bush and the GOP handed all that success to Obama. The fuckers.

 

[Publius1787]

The Iraqi war that might have been is squarely laid at the feet of Donald Rumsfeld and George Bush.

Barack Obama inherited a tangled, confused mess and has done the best he could with what he was handed.

Do you agree, or disagree? Why?

That Status of Forces Agreement, the one Joe Biden "bet his vice presidency on," would have been a nice start toward preventing Iranian influence. They failed nevertheless in their liberal attempt to make friends rather than to pursue US foreign policy interests. Now Iranians have free reign to move military equipment and supplies through Iraq so as to supply the Syrians. Report: Iran, Syria smuggling weapons to Hezbollah through Iraq | JPost | Israel News . Not to mention the Democrats voted down allowing US oil companies to drill in Iraq, and now, they're nothing but British and Chinese companies filling the void. Great job Obama admin! In any case the SOFA agreement would have put us in a much better position. Obama/Biden blew it, washed their hands of it, shrugged their shoulders, pointed toward Bush, and said "wattaya going to do?"

This is the Iraq Obama gave the world. And for Iran, it's working.

 

[deltex1]

Fateful Choice on Iraq Army Bypassed Debate

When President Bush convened a meeting of his National Security Council on May 22, 2003, his special envoy in Iraq made a statement that caught many of the participants by surprise. In a video presentation from Baghdad, L. Paul Bremer III informed the president and his aides that he was about to issue an order formally dissolving Iraq’s Army.

The decree was issued the next day.

But with the fifth anniversary of the start of the war approaching, some participants have provided in interviews their first detailed, on-the-record accounts of a decision that is widely seen as one of the most momentous and contentious of the war, assailed by critics as all but ensuring that American forces would face a growing insurgency led by embittered Sunnis who led much of the army.

The account that emerges from those interviews, and from access to previously unpublished documents, makes clear that Mr. Bremer’s decree reversed an earlier plan — one that would have relied on the Iraqi military to help secure and rebuild the country, and had been approved at a White House meeting that Mr. Bush convened just 10 weeks earlier.

The interviews show that while Mr. Bush endorsed Mr. Bremer’s plan in the May 22 meeting, the decision was made without thorough consultations within government, and without the counsel of the secretary of state or the senior American commander in Iraq, said the commander, Lt. Gen. David D. McKiernan.

When Mr. Bush convened his top national security aides before the March 2003 invasion, he was presented with a clear American plan on what to do with the Iraqi armed forces. American commanders and Jay Garner, the retired lieutenant general who served as the first American administrator in Iraq, planned to use the Iraqi military to help protect the country and as a national reconstruction force.

The plan was outlined in a PowerPoint presentation that Douglas J. Feith, a senior aide to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, gave at a National Security Council meeting that Mr. Bush convened on March 12, eight days before the invasion began. Republican Guard units, the forces deemed most loyal to Mr. Hussein, were to be disarmed, detained and dismantled.

But the rest of the army would be retained. Three to five of the divisions would be used to form the “nucleus” of a new Iraqi Army, according to a copy of the PowerPoint slide, which was obtained by The New York Times. Other Iraqi troops would be used as a reconstruction force to rebuild the nation.

The presentation also carried a caution about the risks of dismissing the army in the early months of an American occupation in a nation racked by high unemployment: “Cannot immediately demobilize 250K-300K personnel and put on the street.”

Bush bungled it. He's an idiot who cost us thousands of American lives unnecessarily.

No doubt the war could have been handled better...too much dithering...nowhere near as hard nosed as it should have been. But in the end it was a win...and then the king of Maui gave it all away.

 

[Kosh]

Bush demobilized the Iraqi Army after the invasion, and that is the only "turning point" that matters.

It will go down as one of the biggest military blunders of all time.

Far left propaganda!

 

[Kosh]

Fateful Choice on Iraq Army Bypassed Debate

When President Bush convened a meeting of his National Security Council on May 22, 2003, his special envoy in Iraq made a statement that caught many of the participants by surprise. In a video presentation from Baghdad, L. Paul Bremer III informed the president and his aides that he was about to issue an order formally dissolving Iraq’s Army.

The decree was issued the next day.

But with the fifth anniversary of the start of the war approaching, some participants have provided in interviews their first detailed, on-the-record accounts of a decision that is widely seen as one of the most momentous and contentious of the war, assailed by critics as all but ensuring that American forces would face a growing insurgency led by embittered Sunnis who led much of the army.

The account that emerges from those interviews, and from access to previously unpublished documents, makes clear that Mr. Bremer’s decree reversed an earlier plan — one that would have relied on the Iraqi military to help secure and rebuild the country, and had been approved at a White House meeting that Mr. Bush convened just 10 weeks earlier.

The interviews show that while Mr. Bush endorsed Mr. Bremer’s plan in the May 22 meeting, the decision was made without thorough consultations within government, and without the counsel of the secretary of state or the senior American commander in Iraq, said the commander, Lt. Gen. David D. McKiernan.

When Mr. Bush convened his top national security aides before the March 2003 invasion, he was presented with a clear American plan on what to do with the Iraqi armed forces. American commanders and Jay Garner, the retired lieutenant general who served as the first American administrator in Iraq, planned to use the Iraqi military to help protect the country and as a national reconstruction force.

The plan was outlined in a PowerPoint presentation that Douglas J. Feith, a senior aide to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, gave at a National Security Council meeting that Mr. Bush convened on March 12, eight days before the invasion began. Republican Guard units, the forces deemed most loyal to Mr. Hussein, were to be disarmed, detained and dismantled.

But the rest of the army would be retained. Three to five of the divisions would be used to form the “nucleus” of a new Iraqi Army, according to a copy of the PowerPoint slide, which was obtained by The New York Times. Other Iraqi troops would be used as a reconstruction force to rebuild the nation.

The presentation also carried a caution about the risks of dismissing the army in the early months of an American occupation in a nation racked by high unemployment: “Cannot immediately demobilize 250K-300K personnel and put on the street.”

Bush bungled it. He's an idiot who cost us thousands of American lives unnecessarily.

Even more far left propaganda!

 

[rdean]

Fateful Choice on Iraq Army Bypassed Debate

When President Bush convened a meeting of his National Security Council on May 22, 2003, his special envoy in Iraq made a statement that caught many of the participants by surprise. In a video presentation from Baghdad, L. Paul Bremer III informed the president and his aides that he was about to issue an order formally dissolving Iraq’s Army.

The decree was issued the next day.

When Mr. Bush convened his top national security aides before the March 2003 invasion, he was presented with a clear American plan on what to do with the Iraqi armed forces. American commanders and Jay Garner, the retired lieutenant general who served as the first American administrator in Iraq, planned to use the Iraqi military to help protect the country and as a national reconstruction force.

The plan was outlined in a PowerPoint presentation that Douglas J. Feith, a senior aide to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, gave at a National Security Council meeting that Mr. Bush convened on March 12, eight days before the invasion began. Republican Guard units, the forces deemed most loyal to Mr. Hussein, were to be disarmed, detained and dismantled.

But the rest of the army would be retained. Three to five of the divisions would be used to form the “nucleus” of a new Iraqi Army, according to a copy of the PowerPoint slide, which was obtained by The New York Times. Other Iraqi troops would be used as a reconstruction force to rebuild the nation.

The presentation also carried a caution about the risks of dismissing the army in the early months of an American occupation in a nation racked by high unemployment: “Cannot immediately demobilize 250K-300K personnel and put on the street.”

Bush bungled it. He's an idiot who cost us thousands of American lives unnecessarily.

Even more far left propaganda!

How about going from 200 billion and "Mission Accomplished" to six trillion and tens of thousands of Americans dead and maimed. And all that success was before Obama. Is that propaganda?

Iraq War Projected to Cost $100 Billion to $200 Billion

200 billion to 6 trillion????? How is that possible???? That's 30 times more.

 

[Kosh]

Fateful Choice on Iraq Army Bypassed Debate







Bush bungled it. He's an idiot who cost us thousands of American lives unnecessarily.

Even more far left propaganda!

How about going from 200 billion and "Mission Accomplished" to six trillion and tens of thousands of Americans dead and maimed. And all that success was before Obama. Is that propaganda?

Iraq War Projected to Cost $100 Billion to $200 Billion

200 billion to 6 trillion????? How is that possible???? That's 30 times more.

And the far left propaganda still continues.

 

[blackhawk]

The Iraq war was mistake I understand the reasons why Bush went in and agreed with it at the time but looking back it was not worth the price we paid. The most notable Bush mistake after the fall of Saddam was as has been mentioned disbanding of the Iraqi military for Obama it was not reaching a deal to extend the status of forces agreement. Iraq is one of many messes in the Middle East both administrations have had a hand in.

 

[Publius1787]

The Iraq war was mistake I understand the reasons why Bush went in and agreed with it at the time but looking back it was not worth the price we paid. The most notable Bush mistake after the fall of Saddam was as has been mentioned disbanding of the Iraqi military for Obama it was not reaching a deal to extend the status of forces agreement. Iraq is one of many messes in the Middle East both administrations have had a hand in.

And watch all the leftists rally around Iraq war advocate Hillary in 2015. http://www.freedomagenda.com/iraq/wmd_quotes.html

 

[Kosh]

The Iraq war was mistake I understand the reasons why Bush went in and agreed with it at the time but looking back it was not worth the price we paid. The most notable Bush mistake after the fall of Saddam was as has been mentioned disbanding of the Iraqi military for Obama it was not reaching a deal to extend the status of forces agreement. Iraq is one of many messes in the Middle East both administrations have had a hand in.

IT has become conventional wisdom that the decision to disband Saddam Hussein’s army was a mistake, was contrary to American prewar planning and was a decision I made on my own. In fact the policy was carefully considered by top civilian and military members of the American government. And it was the right decision.

By the time Baghdad fell on April 9, 2003, the Iraqi Army had simply dissolved. On April 17 Gen. John Abizaid, the deputy commander of the Army’s Central Command, reported in a video briefing to officials in Washington that “there are no organized Iraqi military units left.” The disappearance of Saddam Hussein’s old army rendered irrelevant any prewar plans to use that army. So the question was whether the Coalition Provisional Authority should try to recall it or to build a new one open to both vetted members of the old army and new recruits. General Abizaid favored the second approach.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/06/opinion/06bremer.html?_r=0