...it's not dark yet, but it's gettin' there...

May 21, 2004

Bremer Bashing Time

Strange Women Lying in Ponds has a good piece on the problem with Bremer.

It pains me to write this, but one cannot escape the sense that the Bush Administration is adrift on what to do in Iraq. Bush has allowed the agendas of State, the CIA and DoD to become so alienated and compartmentalized that the acts and omissions of the former are headed toward completely undermining the achievements of the latter. If I were a U.S. soldier or Marine in Iraq right now, I would be very angry at the suits. Hell, I'm not there and I still am angry at the suits. But Bush owes our Armed Forces, who have sacrificed so much, better than this.
Sadly, i don't know enough as i should about Bremer and the minutiae of Iraqi politics. Until recently, i always trusted that the guys in Washington were motivated to make sure the job got done right. Now, i'm beginning to wonder if Bush's loyalty is getting in the way. If Bremer, or for that matter anyone else, is not getting the job done, i say fuck 'em. Truman fired MacArthur in the middle of the Korean War. Victory in this war is no less important.

Posted by annika, May. 21, 2004 |
Rubric: On The Blogosphere


I certainly have a feeling things are going adrift there, you can't just keep saying "stay the course" and "the iraqi's are liberated" ... he needs to say exactly what we are going to do and repeat on a daily basis.

Posted by: Scof on May. 21, 2004

Get a fucking grip. This from people who can't tell you what the strategy is in the place where they are employed. Only the big boys know if they're accomplishing their objectives or not, and if they're aren't, they'll make the changes. At the one year mark, things don't look that bad.

Posted by: Casca on May. 21, 2004

Truman fired MacArthur not for incompetence, but because MacArthur had on several occasions made or skirted the line in making foreign policy, especially with regards to Communist China and Formosa (Taiwan) as opposed to carrying out the policies made in Washington.

"i always trusted that the guys in Washington were motivated to make sure the job got done right." - As someone whose had several tours in the Pentagon to include pre 9/11 and through current operations, I would say that for some folks, getting the job right is considered a nice fringe benefit after pushing your personal agenda.

Yes, things are better than the media shows and I think the overall geo-political grand strategy is good. But at some point, the President has to ask himself whether some of his political appointees, who displayed similar incompetence in less positions in the Bush I and Reagan administrations and survive through the protection of the VP and others, have gone back over the assumptions they chose to accept or reject (in most cases) from their military advisors and considered they may have erred (shocking!) in a few of their judgments. And then, upon solid reflection, present to the President an updated campaign plan. And how about the Nat Sec Advisor actually coordinating the efforts of DOD, CIA, and State departments (or somebody) so we fully use all the elements of national power.

I don't share your optimism that the "big boys" will make changes - at least not before Jan 2005 - or some additional crisis occurs..it's akin to saying they may have made a mistake or two which seems to be the hardest thing to say these days in the Pentagon..Thank goodness the people on the ground improvise and overcome in spite of what goes on back in DC

Posted by: Col Steve on May. 24, 2004