Posted on 08/28/2003 5:08:55 AM PDT by Brian S
PARIS (AFP) Aug 28, 2003 Top Pentagon adviser Richard Perle admitted Thursday that the United States had made a key blunder in its planning ahead of launching its military campaign in Iraq -- the failure to forge close ties with the Iraqi opposition.
Two more US soldiers were killed, and five wounded, in Iraq the previous day as the US military administration struggles to bring the country under control months after declaring the war over.
The US administration has stepped up its efforts to defend its "noble cause" in Iraq this week after the death toll among US troops since the end of major combat overtook the number killed during the invasion.
However Perle, in an interview published in the French newspaper Le Figaro on Thursday, pointed to a key mistake in the planning for the campaign which has hindered efforts to set up a stable, Iraqi-led administration.
"Our biggest mistake, in my opinion, was the failure to work closely with Iraqis before the war so that an Iraqi opposition could have been able to immediately take the matter in hand," Perle admitted.
"Now the solution is to hand over power to the Iraqis as soon as possible."
However Perle said that the answer did not lie in setting up a UN-led administration in Iraq.
"The United Nations system is not adapted to deal with the new threats, like international terrorism" he said.
"The administration of Iraq by the UN is a bad idea. Where has the UN succeeded in administering the territories where it has been placed in charge?"
Perle is recognized as one of the main architects of Washington's campaign to launch the offensive in Iraq although he has since played down his role in hatching the war plan.
The chief US hawk admitted the question of Iraq's possession of weapons of mass destruction remained "crucial" but voiced confidence that examples would be found.
"Rest assured we will discover the whole story of these arms and I am sure that we will soon physically find some."
Looking further afield he said it was "undeniable" that Syria has chemical weapons and that Iran is working on a nuclear arms programme.
"It is a fact that the existence of these arms represents for us a serious threat."
Perle attacked France's leaders for their stance. France failed to support the US-led action in Iraq.
France was wrong to call for more time for UN weapons inspectors to work in Iraq before hostilities commmenced, he told Le Figaro.
President Jacques Chirac and Foreign Secretary Dominique de Villepin "are completely wrong about the consequences in the Arab world... And this analysis was the basis of their opposition to our policy," added Perle, who served as as defense secretary under Ronald Reagan.
One teeny weeny problem. Nobody outside of the media has ever declared this war over.
October of 2002 the Senate and House gave the president authority to use military force to overthrow Saddam Hussien. Call it what you want, Bush didn't go into this like Clinton went into Kosovo (failing to get Congress to authorize the war - they did try, it didn't pass, he attacked anyway).
1) Show me where anybody in the Administration has said "mission accomplished"
2) "End of major combat operations" to me means (follow along closely) end of MAJOR combat operations. If it was the end of all combat operations, why not say "all?" Or simply leave the qualifier out of it and say "end of combat operations." But the President didn't do that, did he?
Had enough?
If we must second guess what is "wrong" in Iraq, I'd blame the damn State Department for not delivering a northern salient through Turkey for the 4th Division...
On another thread someone brilliantly pointed out this would have drained off many of the Iraqi diehards who lived to fight another day as guerillas, which is what we are seeing now...
The "little claim" was done on purpose. Someone else here can answer it more precisely, but the declaration allowed for a different phase of force deployment/support. Doesn't sound so little when looked at objectively.
A banner over his shoulder?? That's the best you can do? There are also pictures of babes on carrier aircraft. Does that make Bush a womanizer as well?
You can have your little fantasies that the Administration and the military were unprepared for this war, or were surprised by enemy resistance, or were not expecting terrorist and guerrilla attacks. But what has occurred has been so basic it's almost laughable (if not so deadly serious). Heck, the only thing that's surprised me (and I'm hardly an expert military planner) was that the regime didn't use WMD and longer range missiles.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.