Powell: U.S. made 'serious mistakes' in Iraq

AP ^ | April 9 2006 | MONIFA THOMAS

[Chgogal]

Powell is NOT great. That is my point.

Bombing the heck out of Fallujah and Tikrit is not overwhelming force. It's just how I, a nonmilitary person, whose mother was in Berlin in 1945 would have done it. Personally, I don't give a hoot about civilian casualties. I care only about our Troops and minimizing losses. Would other tactics proved better, who knows. I don't claim to know.

To date with all the whining about tactics and casualties (although very very tragic) are nothing compared to the mistakes we made in prior wars and what we suffered through in prior wars. Yet, all the whining and second guessing -- it is nauseating and does not help our side win the WOT any faster. As far as I can tell we are doing pretty well in Iraq. Everyday Islamists and Dead-enders blow something up but that is about it. They have lost every battle fought against US Troops, so now they hide and terrorize the Iraqis. The economy is improving, markets are full, increased electric generation cannot keep up with the demand, children are getting better health care, schools are available to all and the Iraqis are forming their own government. In ten years or so, if all goes well, Iraq will be the Mid East model - the shining light on the hill.

That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. ;)

[Naptowne]

Warefare was a lot different during WWII than it is now. In WWII we were also fighting an enemy in the Nazis who had superior weapons and equipment for the most part. The fact is we don't know that our mistakes are nothing compared to prior wars because we havn't won yet. If someone thinks our tactics need to be changed then they have an obligation to voice their opinion whether they are right or wrong. Powell's comments didn't even come close to crossing the line. I get offended when Durbin and Kennedy compared our troops to Sadaam. I don't get offended when former generals critique tactics in a moment of reflection.

I must disagree with aspects of your assessment. The Shiite and Sunni are engaged in conflict. Ignoring it won't change it. You are correct that second-guessing the tactics we used 3 years ago does nothing to solve the current problems, but I think we may want to reconsider our goals in Iraq; i.e. do we really want Iraq to remain one country. Remeber Iraq is the product of Britsh colonialism and really is a middleeastern Yugoslavia. I disagree with the people who seem determined to keep the country in one piece because I feel that is a recipe for prolonging the current problems. that is not second guessing. That is what I think we should consider doing now.

We can agree to disagree on these issues, but I know we both want what is best for the US and the people of Iraq in the long term. That is about all I have to say on the issue.

[Berlin_Freeper]

Are you still posting to me Troll that signed up 4 days ago?

I hope you don't think I will be wasting 5 minutes on your idiocy because I'm not. Tell them back at DUmmies how you been outed by Berlin_Freeper and what a failure you are (they already know).

[normy]

Powell is not a politician enough for Sec State. Maybe he wasn't "bad" but he seemed to be out of his element rubbing elbows and cutting deals with a bunch of scumbags with no honor. As Sec Def he may have gotten frustrated by the Bush administrations lack of desire to annihilate the enemy. Once the war has started, Powell wants to impose Americas will on its enemies.

I do not say Rummy was wrong or Franks or anyone else, it was just a difference of opinion. I do think its wrong not to impose our will and the media be damned. Bush 41 didn't want to finish the job for political purposes and Bush seems to have decided to be way to political in some areas as far as Iraq is concerned.

I believe Powell's way would have been something like a WWII Japanese style conquering (- the nuke). You completely break it down and then build it up in our image.

[AntiGuv]

FWIW, this is what Garner had to say about it: General sacked by Bush says he wanted early elections.

Jay Garner, the US general abruptly dismissed as Iraq's first occupation administrator after a month in the job, says he fell out with the Bush circle because he wanted free elections and rejected an imposed programme of privatisation.

In an interview to be broadcast on BBC Newsnight tonight, he says: "My preference was to put the Iraqis in charge as soon as we can, and do it with some form of elections ... I just thought it was necessary to rapidly get the Iraqis in charge of their destiny."

Asked by the reporter Greg Palast if he foresaw negative repercussions from the subsequent US imposition of mass privatisation , Gen Garner said: "I don't know ... we'll just have to wait and see." It would have been better for the Iraqis to take decisions themselves, even if they made mistakes, he said.

"What I was trying to do was get to a functioning government ... We as Americans like to put our template on things. And our template's good, but it's not necessarily good for everyone else."

[Unicorn]

Powell is just a liberal bozo.

[Unicorn]

I'll buy that.

[MaineVoter2002]

But General, the imposition of American will is no way to "win hearts and minds."...although it is the only way to win.

Sounds almost like he's condemning his own philosophy as Sec. of State

[ex-snook]

"Colin Powell only cares about himself and his image in the press. He wants to appear so wise."

No deal. It's easy for people to admit mistakes that other people have made. It's like Clinton apologizing for slavery.