[Rhodes22-list] Politics: How's It Going?

[Herb Parsons]

DC, you've missed MY point completely. I never even asked if there was "a plan" on this war (though there is). MY point was that I keep hearing about the lack of a plan FOR the war, so I simply asked someone to point out a plan for WWII that resembled the outcome.

What I see on this war is a bunch of new ad-hoc "standards" set as we go along by those that oppose the war. They cite this reason and that reason that make it a "mistake" and indicate we're "failing", when in reality, at least to me, they appear to be after-the-fact excuses to bolster their opposition. They would be opposed if those issues were not in place (actually, often those "issues" AREN'T in place), and would simply find other "reason" to be opposed.

>>> DCLewis1 at aol.com 6/4/2006 11:56:36 pm >>>

Herb,
 
If you review my prior post carefully it did not explicitly  refer to the 
current Administration.  If you would like to make that  inference, feel free.  
My comments were based on the public historical  record.  There was clearly no 
well thought out  plan to deal with the  sectarian conflicts that have 
developed in Iraq.  We were going to be  greeted a liberators, right?  Yeah.  Forget 
that.  We've humored  the Suunies and/or the Shiites , we've bullied the 
Suunies and/or the Shiites  we've tried to coopt the Suunies and/or the Shiites, 
whatever might work, we've  tried it all and none of it has worked. and the 
plan has evolved in real  time.  It's a matter of record that there were 
insufficient civil affairs  personnel available after the invasion - people in those 
military specialties  were frozen in their services.  I believe civil affairs 
military  specialties are still in short supply.  Nor were there sufficient 
native  speakers available.  The entire effort was a flop from t=0.  The  reason 
L Bremer was sent over to replace the lady the State Dept initially  assigned 
to administer Iraq was that the effort  wasn't working.  The  number of troops 
assigned for occupation was far less than Germany, or Japan -  big mistake.   
I say again, the public historical record shows the  occupation of Iraq was 
poorly thought through - that is not a reflection on the  people on the ground 
it's a reflection on the planners and organizers that are  supposed to think 
these things through. In my opinion, the poor planning  has actually put the 
troops on the ground at increased risk.
 
As to your comment that plans to divy up the spoils are not about how  to 
win, let me be clear.  As I understand it Yalta  was indeed  how to divide the 
spoils of war, and it specifically entailed coordination as to  which nation's 
Armies were to operate in which areas.  Moreover, subsequent  to Yalta it was 
necessary for each party to the agreement to assign tangible and  sufficient 
military units to effect their portion of the agreement and for those  units to 
make a best effort to occupy the agreed areas as expeditiously as  possible - 
in military parlance that's called a plan of action, note the word  plan.  The 
US occupation did not "just happen", nor was the area the US  occupied a 
surprise to any party to Yalta.  I believe the US and British  were concerned 
that if they did NOT occupy quickly and as agreed the Soviets  would fill the 
vacuum.  The strategic plan was agreed at Yalta.  A  military campaign plan was 
developed to support that agreement, and conformed in  general terms to the 
codicils of that agreement.  The specific plans for  each military unit flowed 
down from the Yalta agreement - subject to the  opportunities and vagaries of 
war.  Believe it or not, there was a plan to  win the war in Europe, and it 
worked.   Also, the occupation plan  worked.
 
My MacArthur example was explicitly about an occupation plan that had been  
developed prior to the occupation, it was in no way about divying up the spoils 
 of war.  The plan worked and resulted in a minimal loss of American  lives.  
I believe I remember many people thinking the Emperor should have  been held 
as accountable as the rest of his stooges; that is I think the  occupation 
plan in Japan was controversial at the time.  In retrospect it  was brilliant.  
 
Dave
__________________________________________________
Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list