Yet another "Bush got it right bullshit story...

[Bigmack]

I read this post...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x375824
For the next president, simply reversing this administration's policies is not the answer.
By Fareed Zakaria | NEWSWEEK
Published Aug 9, 2008
Aug. 18-25, 2008 issue

And today we have this little piece of shit! The rightwingnuts are re-writing History and the Dems are standing there with their thumbs up their asses.
This country deserves better....
- - - - -
The Point: What Bush got right offers clues for Obama
Philadelphia Inquirer | 9/27/2009 | Mark Bowden
Posted on September 27, 2009 10:45:37 AM PDT by Saije

Three years ago, the war in Iraq seemed lost.

There was little disagreement that the Bush administration, having toppled Saddam Hussein with relative ease, had badly bungled the aftermath. Tank units led by Gen. Tommy Franks had led U.S. forces triumphantly into Baghdad. There had been a ceremonial toppling of Hussein's statue, and the presidential "Mission Accomplished" news conference . . . and then the real war started.

It was a mistake seemingly made in every war in human history; commanders enter superbly prepared to fight the last war, not the one they are in. It turned out that the war in Iraq was not about seizing territory but battling a stubborn, murderous, and determined insurgency embedded in the Iraqi population.

President Bush made a courageous decision in the summer of 2006 to reverse direction, but not the reversal sought by Congress (including then-Sens. Barack Obama and Joe Biden), the American public, the overwhelming majority of the press (including this newspaper), and even most of his own military advisers. Instead of cutting our losses and pulling out of Iraq, as we did in Vietnam, Bush doubled down. He invested more troops and, more important, embraced an entirely new strategy.

And Bush was right. What had happened beneath all of the politics was a small revolution in war-fighting philosophy, championed and implemented by an unlikely military leader, Gen. David Petraeus, a soldier/intellectual molded as much by the think tank as the battlefield. He calls the movement his "Counterinsurgency Nation," and it has rewritten the way America fights...

Now President Obama must decide whether to let this new generation of battle-tested soldiers apply what it has learned to Afghanistan.

[MarjorieG]

1. Another we need to make war because we know how, not because we should. Regardless of how counter

and nation-building we weren't going to do.

[AllentownJake]

2. We started handing out bribes to the tribes not to kill us anymore

That had more to do with the violence decreasing than more troops.

The tribes are still there, still armed, and waiting for us to leave to fight with each other over the resources.

[G_j]

3. absolutely

that is the real story

[Democracyinkind]

5. Actually, it's half of the story. Afghanistan can be a pretty decent place as long as it's not eyed

by the empires.

While I agree that there would be significant violence once we depart, if the Russkies, Paks, Iranians, Indians, Chinese and Yanks could just figure out things withouth playing chess on their country they probably could go back to better times.

It's not as if Fundamentalism is hard wired into them. Tribalism maybe. But much of the shit that people in my Generation associate with Afghanistan is actually just fallout from being an object of imperial lust and ambition.

[annabanana]

4. +1 . . . n/t

[Democracyinkind]

6. Oh and the victory in Iraq is just bullshit. We just stopped caring/listening about the Iraqi plight

[AllentownJake]

7. No we bought them off for a time

Gave their tribal leaders bribes to stop shooting at us and blowing shit up.

They had their armies stand down for a time. They still have their stockpiles of weapons and explosives.

We didn't solve any problem, the only thing we did is we covered it up for a few years.

The moment we leave there and they stop getting their bribe money, they are going to pick up their guns and go to war with whatever coallition government exists.

If you really want to take over and rebuild a nation, the first thing you do is take away the guns. Otherwise you will have roving gangs.

I don't remember us letting the Germans or the Japanese keep their weapons. Actually if I remember correctly we confiscated all of them and secured the ammo dumps.

The war was an awful idea. Its execution was flat out incompetent. After you invade a country you don't allow the populace to remain armed.

[Bigmack]

8. I 'm not sure what you mean...

You think Iraq can be counted a victory? or...

You're saying the "victory" is bullshit?

[Democracyinkind]

9. the latter.

" President Bush made a courageous decision in the summer of 2006 to reverse direction, but not the reversal sought by Congress (including then-Sens. Barack Obama and Joe Biden), the American public, the overwhelming majority of the press (including this newspaper), and even most of his own military advisers. Instead of cutting our losses and pulling out of Iraq, as we did in Vietnam, Bush doubled down. He invested more troops and, more important, embraced an entirely new strategy. "

That part prompted my response. It's not as if we made any significant changes in 2006 and it's not as if they worked or anything changed significantly. The Iraqi people are still fucked in all major aspects and from their perspective the notion of "victory" in Iraq is just preposterous.