Why did our leaders decide to invade Iraq? Since the public is never trusted with the full picture, what follows is speculation.
Iraq probably seemed like a sure thing, a no-brainer.
- Despite the absence of evidence of WMD, Saddam's posturing made their existence appear highly likely.
- In a region dominated by religious states, Iraq was secular. The possibility of religious factionalism must have been judged remote.
- Iraq was governed by an extremely unpopular tyrant.
- Iraq had rich oil fields.
Did any of these reasons justify the war? I certainly don't think so and didn't then. I believe going to war in Iraq was one of the worst foreign policy decisions this country ever made. This disastrous decision was made worse by the incredible incompetency of its execution.
Execution of the War
None of the civilians planning and starting the war had military or combat experience. Colin Powell, who did, was sidelined, then co-opted, then again sidelined. Generals who disagreed with the tactical and strategic methodologies of the invasion received short shrift -- many were reassigned or were forced into or opted for early retirement.
A pity none of the civilians had read Sun Tzu or Carl von Clausewitz or had a background in military history. Even a good football coach knows that the best game plans rarely survive the first set of downs. Absolutely no flexibility to adapt to the unexpected was built into the campaign. Suggestions by commanders in the field for adjustments to conditions on the ground were adamantly resisted by Rumsfeld's War Department.
I reiterate my point in an earlier blog, successful civilian oversight of the military requires civilian commanders who are well educated in military matters. Otherwise they enter war room briefings unequipped to make good decisions. If they wait until they take office, it is too late. Events will overtake them.
Study of history and civics is absolutely essential to a viable society.
No comments:
Post a Comment