Iraq War blunder forseen by military
A series of secret U.S. war games in 1999 showed that an invasion and post-war administration of Iraq would require 400,000 troops, nearly three times the number there now.
And even then, the games showed, the country still had a chance of dissolving into chaos.
I would repeat the clarion call to fire Rumsfeld, but what’s the point? Bush has made it patently clear he wants the amateur hour to continue at whatever cost. Other prescient predictions by the Desert Crossing war game:
- “A number of factors including aggressive neighbors, fragmentation along religious and/or ethnic lines, and chaos created by rival forces bidding for power could adversely affect regional stability.” And yet no one “saw the insurgency coming”.
- The new regime will be “problematic” if perceived as a “weak, a puppet or out of step”. Isn’t it fair to say that problematic turns to critical if all three are true?
- Going to war might cause problems with our coalition partners.
The right will dismiss this out of hand as pre-9/11 nonsense. Don’t let them do it - circulate this story and spread the word. It might get buried under the Hussein verdict news.
The administration cannot pretend they were ignorant of the unique challenges of post-war Iraq. Anyone who still backs the administration should start asking the hard questions soon or prepare to be thrown out of power on Tuesday.
November 5th, 2006 at 7:30 pm
My experience with the military (second hand) is that they are very good at learning from the past and taking an unvarnished look at the future, because their asses are on the line.
it’s the policymakers who fail them; especially those guided by ideology instead of reality.
November 5th, 2006 at 9:27 pm
Exactly, but I’d expand the blame to the civilian burecrats as well (i.e. Rumsfeld)