[lit-ideas] Re: Willie Pete's Role Reversal
- From: "Andy Amago" <aamago@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 15:52:12 -0500
---- Original Message -----
From:
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: 11/13/2005 3:21:20 PM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Willie Pete's Role Reversal
In a message dated 11/13/2005 2:05:42 P.M. Central Standard Time,
aamago@xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
We're trying to win a war militarily that the military has said cannot be won
militarily.
HI,
But here I would disagree with you.
I do not think that this war was ever done the way the military would have done
it.
A.A. Correct. The Army told Rove, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld they needed far more
troops than they Rove, et al. wanted to use. The Rove, et al. big plan was
mechanizing the military, using "lily pads", decreased need for soldiers. They
were warned by the Army that Iraq couldn't be taken with a force the size of
the NYPD. Rove, et al. went ahead anyway. They raised the final number of
soldiers, but not to the level the Army wanted. See Frontline if it's still
available.
I think it was done the way civilian analysts (neo-cons but probably others,
too--those into the whole technology movement...) thought it could be done.
Quite possibly, those in the military industrial complex (who should have known
better?) were also involved...but who knows.
A.A. Yes, the civilians in the White House as outlined above, who never saw
combat.
No--this war could still be done differently and have an outcome which would be
positive for the Iraqis.
A.A. Not by the military it can't. They've said so.
If we choose not to do that, then I do think we need to leave.
A.A. It's a rock and a hard place. Or Iraq and a hard place, as the case may
be. Who specifically do you think planned this war? Your above statements
about the civilian analysts are quite general.
But, either way would necessitate the neo-con crowd saying 'we were wrong'
--and I think they will have an easier time whining about how the anti-war
crowd destroyed the American Spirit (or some such rhetoric) than by agreeing
with the military guys who were appalled at how/why the decisions have been
made...(which is easier to lose face with...You ego-guys might be able to
project yourselves into their brains to see which would be the easiest
face-saving way out...)
A.A. If there was a way out, it'd have been taken by now. There is no way out.
Except leaving. Clinton said to leave and give no time line so the insurgents
can't plan around it.
Andy Amago
Balancing again,
Marlena in Missouri
Other related posts:
