Posted by Sir Four at 11:39am Mar 7 '13Some things that I think were learned:
1) Americans had been fed a diet of propaganda to heighten the fear of Saddam Hussein. I recall in the 90s and early Bush years, we were told how fearsome Hussein's military was. Something along the lines of having one of the world's largest standing armies, well-trained and well-equipped for war. And of course he had all those WMDs. Personally I was not convinced that it was even probable he had functional WMDs, but I did buy that he had a fearsome military otherwise. That's what these dictators do, right? Build a formidable military to dissuade foreign attacks? Today I believe the US government simply chose to overstate the threat. Furthermore I now believe that third world countries are simply unable to field a serious military--by serious I mean able to give NATO countries a run for their money.
We're told of North Korea's military strength. Don't they have the #1 largest standing army? Haven't the Kims fed all the country's wealth into the military? Sure, but that's not saying much. How well-trained are they, how well-equipped, and how well-nourished? How prepared are they to meet 21st Century war technology? Can NK perform adequate war logistics? Will average soldiers simply drop their guns and hide when faced with insurmountable challenges, as did so many Iraqis? Of course, these questions are moot because of...
2) Defeating third world armies is not the hard part. It can be done relatively easily. The post war period is the hard part. This is where it gets expensive, confusing, and dangerous. And we're not good at managing this period, at all. We can win the war, but not create lasting stability. Afghanistan, Iraq, and now Libya are showing that. This is the real reason why we must avoid war, not because these dictators have formidable militaries.
3) Group-think in Washington is very dangerous. We should take care never to elect presidents who don't welcome internal debates from people with differing views on foreign policy matters. The Bush administration convinced themselves of a whole bunch of illusions about Iraq: evidence of WMD would be found, thus justifying the war. The war would be cheap and quick. There was no need for an exit strategy because we'll just get a friendly leader in charge--this will work out because the Iraqi citizens will be so grateful to us for ridding them of the tyrant Saddam. When everyone in the administration was echoing these same views, they became taken for granted as true. The meek Colin Powell raised a few concerns, but was eventually told to drink the kool-aid--and he dutifully did. We can't let this situation happen again.
1) Americans had been fed a diet of propaganda to heighten the fear of Saddam Hussein. I recall in the 90s and early Bush years, we were told how fearsome Hussein's military was. Something along the lines of having one of the world's largest standing armies, well-trained and well-equipped for war. And of course he had all those WMDs. Personally I was not convinced that it was even probable he had functional WMDs, but I did buy that he had a fearsome military otherwise. That's what these dictators do, right? Build a formidable military to dissuade foreign attacks? Today I believe the US government simply chose to overstate the threat. Furthermore I now believe that third world countries are simply unable to field a serious military--by serious I mean able to give NATO countries a run for their money.
We're told of North Korea's military strength. Don't they have the #1 largest standing army? Haven't the Kims fed all the country's wealth into the military? Sure, but that's not saying much. How well-trained are they, how well-equipped, and how well-nourished? How prepared are they to meet 21st Century war technology? Can NK perform adequate war logistics? Will average soldiers simply drop their guns and hide when faced with insurmountable challenges, as did so many Iraqis? Of course, these questions are moot because of...
2) Defeating third world armies is not the hard part. It can be done relatively easily. The post war period is the hard part. This is where it gets expensive, confusing, and dangerous. And we're not good at managing this period, at all. We can win the war, but not create lasting stability. Afghanistan, Iraq, and now Libya are showing that. This is the real reason why we must avoid war, not because these dictators have formidable militaries.
3) Group-think in Washington is very dangerous. We should take care never to elect presidents who don't welcome internal debates from people with differing views on foreign policy matters. The Bush administration convinced themselves of a whole bunch of illusions about Iraq: evidence of WMD would be found, thus justifying the war. The war would be cheap and quick. There was no need for an exit strategy because we'll just get a friendly leader in charge--this will work out because the Iraqi citizens will be so grateful to us for ridding them of the tyrant Saddam. When everyone in the administration was echoing these same views, they became taken for granted as true. The meek Colin Powell raised a few concerns, but was eventually told to drink the kool-aid--and he dutifully did. We can't let this situation happen again.