Fiasco: The American Military Adventure in Iraq

  • News
  • Thread starter Cyrus
  • Start date
  • #26
2,985
15
Mickey said:
Well, I can't really say much, other than that you guys don't take the enemy seriously either. You're like the president, except that you're honest enough to not start something that you won't take seriously. So, that's good. We need more of that kind of honesty.
It's not a matter of taking the enemy seriously, its about not being stupid in how you go about eliminating/neutralizing the enemy.

cyrusabdollahi, you should see if you can catch a show on the Military channel called "Battleplan." It details the requirements for plans by tactic (e.g. flank attack, raid, premptive strike) and examines historical examples to see how they fit or did not fit the plan, why, and the results. These requirements are absolute and necessary. They have not changed at all throughout history. The reason is because they are at a high level of abstraction, and are meant to guide the creation of new ground-level plans, which are constantly going out the window. War is chaotic and always has been, so soldiers need a streamlined system for making plans on the go.

That's just the sad reality.
I think you should read more about what the experts are saying, and less on what a show called battleplan is telling you. Frankly, there was no planning for this war.
 
  • #27
kyleb
The disagreement here basically comes down to; so battles should be chosen wisely, or should you just make it up as you go?
 
  • #28
slugcountry
kyleb said:
The disagreement here basically comes down to; so battles should be chosen wisely, or should you just make it up as you go?
I don't think it takes a military expert to answer that question. Football teams don't make game plans as they go along, why would armies.
 
  • #29
2,985
15
slugcountry said:
I don't think it takes a military expert to answer that question. Football teams don't make game plans as they go along, why would armies.
With all due respect, I think you should refrain from posting if you dont know what you're talking about.
 
  • #30
kyleb
Slugcountry does make a good point. :wink:
 
  • #31
2,985
15
No, football teams do make game plans as they go. Even his analogy is senseless! :confused:

Why are we even talking about this!? Back on topic. :grumpy:
 
  • #32
67
165
kyleb said:
The disagreement here basically comes down to; so battles should be chosen wisely, or should you just make it up as you go?
We went into Iraq totally unprepared for anything that happened after the summer of 03.
In the type of military scenario we are now facing, it must be a "make it up as you go" concept, because we can't adapt our traditional tactics as fast as the insergents can change their untraditional tactics.
 
  • #33
slugcountry
cyrusabdollahi said:
No, football teams do make game plans as they go. Even his analogy is senseless! :confused:

Why are we even talking about this!? Back on topic. :grumpy:
man you're demented, ask any good coach (in ANY team sport) if he goes into a game without a game plan.

edit: although of course any good plan should be dynamic enough to change to the situation - I think the main issue here is that there was no gameplan to begin with, pretty sure we can all agree on that one.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #34
2,985
15
Buddy, I dont care about football. Stop talking about it or leave. :grumpy:
 
  • #35
67
165
slugcountry said:
man you're demented, ask any good coach (in ANY team sport) if he goes into a game without a game plan.

edit: although of course any good plan should be dynamic enough to change to the situation - I think the main issue here is that there was no gameplan to begin with, pretty sure we can all agree on that one.
This game plan was made up by a bunch of arm chair quarter backs who never really played the game. Watch the video while it is still available. It is a real eye opener and worth the time spent. Hint: You can clean your room while listening.:smile:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4926293608118312619&q=Thomas+Ricks [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #36
kyleb
cyrusabdollahi said:
Buddy, I dont care about football. Stop talking about it or leave. :grumpy:
You are just missing his point; battles should be chosen wisely rather than made up as you go along.
 
  • #37
2,985
15
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHH I misread what he wrote.

I am sorry buddy! :redface: :frown:
 
  • #38
Tsu
Gold Member
371
63
cyrusabdollahi said:
Tonight on Charlie Rose there was an interview with Thomas Ricks, reporter for the Washington post, concerning his new book: “Fiasco: The American Military Adventure in Iraq.”

It was really sad to hear him tell account after account of how the US did nothing short of sell a war that was a lie to the American public. Not only was it a lie, they were not prepared for this war. The troops were not prepared, Rumsfield was not prepared.

Adding insult to injury, the people who did have competence, the Military and the CIA, were ignored when they told the Rumsfield et al. that the intelligence was NOT certain, there was NOT enough planning, we only sent in half as many troops as we needed, the list goes on and on.

I am waiting for the transcripts to come online and then I will post with actual quotes.

-A side note, he is not the only one who has openly stated the total and complete failure of the planning that went behind this war. Nearly everyone Rose interviewed has said the same thing, including the Military. Not enough planning, no plan for insurgency, no exit strategy, turmoil between Rumsfield and the Generals, congress sitting idly by and not pressuring the president.
I saw that. It was an excellent interview. I love Charlie Rose. Can't wait to read this book.
 
  • #39
2,985
15
Tsu said:
I saw that. It was an excellent interview. I love Charlie Rose. Can't wait to read this book.
A woman of impeccable taste :tongue:
 
  • #40
45
0
I'd like to take a moment to point out something that I find interesting. The majority of the people who take the time to post here are people who are willing to look beyond what the media feeds them and generate more intelligent discussion\opinion.

I think the majority of people feel that what's transpired here is terrible and that we're going to see the repercussions of this for many years to come.

If we are to make any use of our time I think there should be some form of objective in mind:
1.What is the best outcome that we could hope for at this time?
2.How could this be accomplished?

I hate to say it be I feel like the majority of people spend to much time explaining why we are were we are instead of focusing on the fact that we could save many lives if we thought about how to address the problem going forward.

It seems to me that even if the monkeys running this show acted in the perfect way, we would not know they did so because we've not decided what the correct action should be (not that I'm qualified to make this decision).

I think of the problem similar to littering – people will always tell you that dropping one piece of paper is not going to make any difference – the reality is that if everyone thinks like this, the street will be a mess. How we as individuals effect the environment around us at this point in time makes a big difference – but unless we know exactly what it is we're trying to do, we can't hope to accomplish it.

Bottom Line: Let's focus on the resolution – how do we resolve \ improve the problem?
 
Last edited:
  • #41
Skyhunter
WarrickF said:
Bottom Line: Let's focus on the resolution – how do we resolve \ improve the problem?
As long as the US is run by the neo-cons, there is no viable solution. If the opposition cannot get control of one of the Houses, then the arrogance, secrecy, and incompetence will continue. The current Congressional leadership has shown no willingness to conduct any oversight.

This is the most important mid-term election in my lifetime.

Nice link, I read the transcript, and am now listening to the interview.

Later today I will visit my friend at the local non-chain book store and purchase the book. I only have so much time for reading, so I am selective in the books I read. This is one I feel is a must read.

With the events in Lebanon, there is an escalation of violence in the middle east. According to a plan called "Clean Break", Iraq was phase1, Lebanon is phase2, phase3 is Syria, and phase4 Iran.

My greatest fear is that the timetable is set to escalate before the midterms. What will be the effects on the Congressional races if the US military is engaged in a hot war in the ME?
 
  • #42
pcorbett
cyrusabdollahi said:
It was really sad to hear him tell account after account of how the US did nothing short of sell a war that was a lie to the American public. Not only was it a lie, they were not prepared for this war. The troops were not prepared, Rumsfield was not prepared.
If it were universally true, then how is it we were able to deploy force to theater in the first place? You have to admit that the United States was ready and successfully deployed. Perhaps you're missing a qualification or two?
 
  • #43
2,985
15
That was a pretty pointless post, with all due respect. Do you have any real facts to present?

What does the deployment of force have to do with what we are talking about? No one is questioning our capability to deploy force, are they? No.

Read the sources I have provided to you, they are missing no qualifications. If you have problems about qualifications with the Director of the CIA, Bob Woodward, and Thomas Ricks, stay far, far away from my thread.
 
Last edited:
  • #44
2,985
15
Look, I am not trying to be rude to you pcorbett, but I do not want this post to become diluted with posts of peoples opinions. I only want facts from credible sources.

I am trying to avoid a bandwagon of people giving every opinion under the sun and this thread running off on wild tangents.

We are not going to proceed with the discussion of our military capability and deployment any longer, sorry. You are more than welcome to start a thread on it if you would like to.
 
  • #45
Bystander
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
5,191
1,212
cyrusabdollahi said:
(snip)I am trying to avoid a bandwagon of people giving every opinion under the sun and this thread running off on wild tangents.
OK.

We are not going to proceed with the discussion of our military capability and deployment any longer, sorry. You are more than welcome to start a thread on it if you would like to.
"Fiasco" w'out military capabilities --- not sure I see what you're after then. Politics behind the war?
 
  • #46
2,985
15
Yes, the politics leading up to and during this war, which have all be a terrible lie to the American public.

The title of this thread is after Ricks book. That should have been clear from my first post if you have been following this thread.

I will try and dig up more good transcripts later.
 
  • #47
Bystander
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
5,191
1,212
All "politics" is all lies --- you have specific lies in mind, or Rick (Ricks?) has --- you up to trying a "one at a time" approach?
 
  • #48
2,985
15
I do not follow what you are saying, sorry.
 
  • #49
Bystander
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
5,191
1,212
I'm assuming you have particular lies in mind. Do you want to try discussing them one "lie" at a time, and establishing whether they're really lies, or information gaps through which interpolations have been made based on previous history of, and experiences with the ME?
 
  • #50
2,985
15
The infromation is in the transcrips I have provided. There is no 'information gap,' there has been a clear selectivity in the usage of facts presented to the American public.

It is clearly explained in the transcript of Ricks.
 

Related Threads on Fiasco: The American Military Adventure in Iraq

Replies
38
Views
6K
Replies
127
Views
16K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • Last Post
3
Replies
68
Views
6K
  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
4K
Top