June 20, 2007


we made huge mistakes early on and are pumping blood and gold into the region to pay for those blunders. When we failed to secure the streets and to restore the stability needed to get Iraq on its feet, we sowed doubt and mistrust. When we disbanded the government and the army, and tolerated corruption and ineptitude in reconstruction, we created a vacuum and filled the ranks of an insurgency-hydra with mostly local talent. But when we flattened parts of Fallujah not once, but twice, primarily in response to the murders of four of our people, we helped create a spectacle of injustice and chaos, the very conditions in which Al Qaeda thrives.


bold as love said...


Most of your statements are half-truths, but I'll give you full credit for them. What you described is typical after a war- mistakes are made, schemes are hatched.

You will find this post war situation throughout history.

What is truly screwing up the works is Syria's and Iran's involvment in the terror game. It wasn't local talent that spun Iraq off into chaos, no, it is regimes like the two mentioned that can't afford a free and functional Iraq and have been actively financing, training, and providing intelligence for terrorists.

I supported the invasion of Iraq and the attempt to build somthing democratic there, but if we don't get some of the bullshit under control soon- we might as well pack up and leave.


DAVE BONES said...

Hey Mr. As Love. Still slagging off those bastard hippies I hope.

I'm not there but I think atitudes of US soldiers to foreigners isn't helping in some cases.

BigDog said...

Dave: What attitudes would those be? Its a serious question. From what I have gathered, American soldiers are themselves the best ambassidors we have. Whereas, reporters and NGOs annoy and earn contempt for their attitude and ideology.

BigDog said...

pardon my spelling. 'ambassador'

DAVE BONES said...

Neither of us are there, both of us are probably inclined to believe stories from diferent sides.This sort of thing disturbs me the most and this makes me wonder how much of this goes unreported.

I.:.S.:. said...

"From what I have gathered, American soldiers are themselves the best ambassidors we have. Whereas, reporters and NGOs annoy and earn contempt for their attitude and ideology."

I don't know Iraq either but Afghanistan maybe I do a bit better.

Absolutely disagree with the first statement. Loads of Afghans are happy the US/Coalition are here, but complain about the behaviour of US troops. There are 38 nations in ISAF, although only the Brits and Canadians are seeing as much and sometimes more combat than the Americans. However, for some reason it is ONLY ever American troops who do things like light up on every herd of goats, roadside teashop, schoolkid on a bicycle, crowd of curious bystanders etc. within range with .50-cals when a roadside bomb goes off. Many people have told me British troops are infinitely better at relating to the locals, and this is not just out of politeness to me, as I always tell people I'm Finnish.

The Taliban are winning the media/ information/propaganda war in the south, no question at all. The Americans have not endeared themselves to the local population at all, and at the moment, what is at stake and the single most crucial factor in this conflict now is the legitimacy of the US-backed Karzai government and of US actions in the minds of the southern population.

Agree with the journalists and NGOs bit. Don't get me started on journalists, and most NGOs and UN people who are allegedly reconstructing the country are riding the development industry scam gravy-train, riding around in their big SUVs and generating policy papers that have nothing to do with reality.