The Department of Defense has exaggerated the readiness of Iraqi army and police forces, claiming 312,400 men have been "trained and equipped," a figure that is so wildly off the mark that the country will likely require the support of the US military well into 2010, according to two new reports.
The reports were drafted by Anthony Cordesman, a member of the bipartisan think tank Center for Strategic and International Studies and a renowned expert in Middle East issues and military affairs.
Cordesman, who also served in a senior capacity at the Pentagon during the Reagan administration, recently returned from a fact-finding mission in Iraq, where he was briefed by military and civilians about the realities on the ground that have left the country in a state of civil war. His lengthy reports are a damning indictment of the US military leadership at the Pentagon and senior Bush administration officials, who he says launched the Iraq invasion without having "implemented a realistic, self-critical or forward looking approach to any aspect of its policy in Iraq."
One of the Bush administration's "most critical failures has been to consistently deny the fact it was pursuing a high effort in nation building and stability operations that could easily fail," Cordesman wrote in a report published Tuesday, "Iraqi Force Development and the Challenge of Civil War."
"The strategy the to stabilize Iraq that the US announced in the fall of 2005 was deeply flawed in timing and resources," Cordesman's report says. "It was based on a grossly exaggerated estimate of political success, an almost deliberately false exaggeration of the success of the economic aid effort and progress in developing the [Iraqi Security Forces], inadequate efforts to develop effective governance, and a rule of law, and has not succeeded."
"The basic problem with all Iraqi forces is that while 300,000 have been trained and equipped, many have since left and deserted, substantial numbers have been killed and wounded, and some 10-20% of those who remain are absent at any given time because they leave to take care of their families and transfer their pay in a country where there is no meaningful banking system," Cordesman wrote in a November 2 report, "Options for Expanding Iraqi Forces: Goals and Realities."
Furthermore, US officials deceive Congress in reports that are "so misleading that there is no way to determine just how serious the problem is and what resources will be required."
"The US Defense Department has stopped releasing detailed unclassified material about Iraqi army, police, and border enforcement readiness, only giving information about how many units are 'ready and equipped' and 'in the lead,'" Cordesman wrote in the November 28 report.
"These are vague, if not meaningless categories - 'in the lead' does not indicate the level of independence from US support, and we do not how many 'ready and equipped' soldiers quit or deserted the force."
To date, "no administration official has presented any plan to properly equip the Iraqi forces to stand on their own or give them the necessary funding to phase out US combat and air support in 12 to 18 months," Cordesman wrote in the earlier November report, adding, that in reality, Iraqi military forces may need to be backed up by a substantial number of US servicemen and servicewomen through 2010 before they are capable of securing the country.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/112906J.shtml
5 comments:
I heard this meeting was postponed due to a leak. Of course from us and it was negative about Iran, something like we don't trust them. That's always the attitude to have going into a meeting with someone? Not!
I was listening to an interview with Jimmy Carter on the radio today. He talked about we should get all the Gulf States together and have them work with us that would be the best solution. And he has never heard this administration once say anything about eventually completely pulling out. Do you think this idea ever cross the Gerbil Adminstration's mind?
Also I heard there is a new website for Obama and a petition to sign to get him to run.
Run Obama
North side of Chicago property
Keep in mind you can buy out homes in a whole entire aldermatic ward on the south side of Chicago for this kind of money(or pretty close). That should give you a clear idea of property value from one end of town to the next.
Thanks for the Obama petition. I did sign it.
Yeah, I did hear that the meeting was cancelled. Again, everytime the Gerbil opens his mouth, he lets out his ignorance and lack of leadership.
I did click on the article of the North side Chicago property. Yikes! 6 million. Sure people like Oprah, business people, and celebrities can afford that home but not the everyday people who want the American dream to have a home. I just think that the media glamorize the celebrities too much. If you can afford that type of home and you are a non-celebrity and earned your money, then go for it. There are people that I know personally that are very wealthy that live in areas that are not where the celebrities live. I think people should choose where they want to live. Unfortunately, the Gerbil's mess has dicated to people where they should live. That is unfair...
If the Gerbil wanted to wipe out the middle class he is doing well. The GNP, and from last month is up but that is not an true indicator on how well the economy is doing. Or how well the job market is.
Sometimes things look good on paper until you analyze them.
Yes celebrities are grossly overpaid, so are some CEO's, especially when the people at thier companies are getting paid minimally.
"Yes celebrities are grossly overpaid, so are some CEO's, especially when the people at thier companies are getting paid minimally."
Yes, they are. A person who is a millionaire or what I called wealthy according to Robert Kiyaski's book, "Cashflow Quadrant," a person is able to pay for things such as a home, car, etc. in cash in full (and I am not talking about illegally or credit cards) and their cashflow exceeds with use of passive portfolio money where money keep coming in without their efforts. We talking about the Bill Gates, Michael Dell, Ray Kroc, Howard Schultz of Starbucks ,and so on. We are talking about people who created a vehicle that they created for ongoing residual income. Celebrities are a dime and dozen. Those are people that I can't say that are "rich."
About CEOs? Yes, they are over paid.. The corporation have been giving a free pass by the Admininstration to dictate the dollar amount for the CEOs. And I like what Walt Disney did with CEO Robert Iger's bonuses. If Iger's doesn't make a prifit for Disney at the end of the year, he will not get a raise... He signed that agreement when he became CEO. When Michael Eisner was CEO, Disney never had that agreement with him. Eisner gave himself a raise year after year despite Disney was losing money. And he has held two titles, CEO and Chairman of the Board, which he had two seperate salaries. Now those positions are now separated. Currently, I am shareholder for a company where that CEO held two titles and therefore from the votes from shareholders, that CEO had his titles separated.
Post a Comment