War Games In '99 Predicted Iraq Problems

Said Invasion Would Require 400,000 Troops — And Chaos Might Still Ensue

(AP)  The U.S. government conducted a series of secret war games in 1999 that anticipated an invasion of Iraq would require 400,000 troops, and even then chaos might ensue.

In its "Desert Crossing" games, 70 military, diplomatic and intelligence officials assumed the high troop levels would be needed to keep order, seal borders and take care of other security needs.

The documents came to light Saturday through a Freedom of Information Act request by the George Washington University's National Security Archive, an independent research institute and library.

"The conventional wisdom is the U.S. mistake in Iraq was not enough troops," said Thomas Blanton, the archive's director. "But the Desert Crossing war game in 1999 suggests we would have ended up with a failed state even with 400,000 troops on the ground."

There are currently about 144,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, down from a peak of about 160,000 in January.

A spokeswoman for U.S. Central Command, which sponsored the seminar and declassified the secret report in 2004, declined to comment Saturday because she was not familiar with the documents.

The war games looked at "worst case" and "most likely" scenarios after a war that removed then-Iraqi President Saddam Hussein from power. Some are similar to what actually occurred after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003:

"A change in regimes does not guarantee stability," the 1999 seminar briefings said. "A number of factors including aggressive neighbors, fragmentation along religious and/or ethnic lines, and chaos created by rival forces bidding for power could adversely affect regional stability."

"Even when civil order is restored and borders are secured, the replacement regime could be problematic — especially if perceived as weak, a puppet, or out-of-step with prevailing regional governments."

"Iran's anti-Americanism could be enflamed by a U.S.-led intervention in Iraq," the briefings read. "The influx of U.S. and other western forces into Iraq would exacerbate worries in Tehran, as would the installation of a pro-western government in Baghdad."

"The debate on post-Saddam Iraq also reveals the paucity of information about the potential and capabilities of the external Iraqi opposition groups. The lack of intelligence concerning their roles hampers U.S. policy development."

"Also, some participants believe that no Arab government will welcome the kind of lengthy U.S. presence that would be required to install and sustain a democratic government."

"A long-term, large-scale military intervention may be at odds with many coalition partners."


©MMVI, The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Share:

Digg

Facebook

Yahoo! Buzz

Twitter

Mixx

Video and Galleries from Iraq After Saddam

• Photos Iraq Photos: June 29-July 5
• Photos Iraq Photos: June 22 ? June 28
• Photos Iraq Photos: June 15 ? June 21

Latest in Iraq After Saddam

Biden Meets with Key U.S. Leaders in Iraq

Senate Investigates Blackwater Subsidiary

Celebration, Carnage Mark Handover in Iraq

Add a Comment See all 36 Comments

by jhindson1 November 5, 2006 1:44 AM PST

So they knew the probable outcome all along. . . . .

Reckless disregard for the research and lack of due dilligence.

The Generals were right all along, and were silenced by Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld on the urging from the top of the cabal -- Cheney and Bush

Reply to this comment

by kstrisha November 5, 2006 2:08 AM PST

Quote: "But the Desert Crossing war game in 1999 suggests we would have ended up with a failed state even with 400,000 troops on the ground."

=======

Our country is controlled by idiots...

Reply to this comment

by tnichlsn November 5, 2006 2:52 AM PST

kstrisha - your "idiots" comment is being too kind, they are sending our kids to slaughter in Iraq, I can think of stronger words to describe them but then my comment would get 'reported'!

Reply to this comment

by juliehg-2009 November 5, 2006 3:39 AM PST

Duh!!

Goooooood Moooooorning Iraaaaak!!!

Reply to this comment

by alphaa10-2009 November 5, 2006 3:56 AM PST

More compelling evidence Bush has a singular gift for deluding himself and others, and that Rumsfeld is an egomaniac on auto-pilot. Because Rumsfeld knew of this exercise and its somber conclusions, it is entirely reasonable that he informed Bush of its negative conclusions about Iraq.

But it is impossible to suppose Bush did not know after US Army Gen. Erik Shinseki testified in public session of Congress about the military risks of Iraq and the need for massive troop levels.

Yet, as early as 2001, Bush was intent on invading Iraq-- damning the torpedoes of caution and reason. And in return for his sage and courageous warnings about Iraq, Gen. Shinseki got only pointed humiliation and browbeating from Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz, railroading him into retirement, as if to set an example to others who might stand in the way of the Bush regime.

All Bush wanted was a convincing pastiche of fear and an utterly contrived rationale of clear and present danger to US national security. Bush characteristically blamed others-- Tenet for supposed "intelligence failures" and Shinseki (via Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz) for false counsel-- rather than acknowledge it was he, alone, who fudged the facts about Iraq, and ignored his own generals and reasoned Pentagon warnings.

Reply to this comment

by alphaa10-2009 November 5, 2006 3:57 AM PST

More compelling evidence Bush has a singular gift for deluding himself and others, and that Rumsfeld is an egomaniac on auto-pilot. Because Rumsfeld knew of this exercise and its somber conclusions, it is entirely reasonable that he informed Bush of its negative conclusions about Iraq.

But it is impossible to suppose Bush did not know after US Army Gen. Erik Shinseki testified in public session of Congress about the military risks of Iraq and the need for massive troop levels.

Yet, as early as 2001, Bush was intent on invading Iraq-- damning the torpedoes of caution and reason. And in return for his sage and courageous warnings about Iraq, Gen. Shinseki got only pointed humiliation and browbeating from Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz, railroading him into retirement, as if to set an example to others who might stand in the way of the Bush regime.

All Bush wanted was a convincing pastiche of fear and an utterly contrived rationale of clear and present danger to US national security. Bush characteristically blamed others-- Tenet for supposed "intelligence failures" and Shinseki (via Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz) for false counsel-- rather than acknowledge it was he, alone, who fudged the facts about Iraq, and ignored his own generals and reasoned Pentagon warnings.

See link to original story about Gen. Shinseki-- http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/attack/consequences/2003/0228pentagoncontra.htm

Reply to this comment

by heetseeker November 5, 2006 4:39 AM PST

Iraq and "debacle" will forever be mentioned in the same breath... I have commented in the past that the war is a classic demonstration of the arrogance of power...

Arrogance never considers consequence or implications...

As more and more information begins to trickle out about the ineptitude, incompetence and corruption surrounding the Iraqi war I am wondering whether our legislature should not undertake a thorough investigation into the rationale for going to war (who knew what, when etc) .... Clearly, we now know that the administration was far better advised and informed than first thought...

The nation needs this for its healing... & goodness knows that the nearly 3,000 US troops and the orphans, widows & widowers that have been created in the wake of this war... deserve to know the truth...

So grave are the charges being levelled against this administration and so grevious the implications of its actions... that if indeed such an investigation uncovered gross misconduct in the prosecution of this war, then I GWB should be impeached... there can be no other option...

Such an action would serve as a warning to any other administration that would so carelessly commit the nations resources to war...

Reply to this comment

by November 5, 2006 4:54 AM PST

The situation in Iraq is a direct result of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and the rest of the clown posse making decisions and thinking they know what's best.

The decisions should have been left to those who know what they are doing - the Generals - not those who have no idea of what they are doing.

Reply to this comment

by clownsleft November 5, 2006 4:58 AM PST

Nicely said, Heatseeker.

Unfortunately, the ethics of the corrupt and arrogant currently in power, especially when combined with the apathy of the sheep (so well protected by the Jaineys out there) and the oversight failures of our Constitutional safeguards (Congress, the press, etc.) make any investigation just as ineffectual as those that have already been conducted.

"Proud to be an American" is no longer as easy as it used to be. Our children will nnever know the pride and trust that we all once had, as the shameful, embarrassing and criminal actions of this administration may never be overcome.

Reply to this comment

by heetseeker November 5, 2006 6:03 AM PST

mcdazz

I guess what I am thinking is that there are two types of investigation... the ones that took place before next Tuesday and the ones that will take place after next Tuesday... if you get my drift?

My only hope is that any new investigation is focused on uncovering the truth in a balanced non-partisan way... the investigation must be fully bi-partisan, open & transparent... we cannot afford to play politics, whilst our young men & women are being slaughtered on foreign fields...

If we truly want to honour our fallen (which is the constant refrain of this administration)... let them know why they died so that their loved ones may have peace...

I would not want to pre-judge the outcomes of any new investigation... but based an the drip-drip of new revelations coming out about pre-war preparation and planning... it will surely uncover failures at the highest levels of Government, destroy reputations & discredit ideologies...

Iraq has become a poisonous sore... and a cancer at the heart of our nation... for this, sun-light is the best disinfectant..

Reply to this comment

by rharrin1 November 5, 2006 7:22 AM PST

I have been saying this all along. OIL OIL OIL
Check bush it's oil all oil his company did not do good the bin laden family dumped money into it to keep it from bankruptcy the port deal it's all over oil

Reply to this comment

by exusmcsgt November 5, 2006 7:27 AM PST

This is more confirmation of Rumsfeld's tendency to see the world according to Rumsfeld as opposed to reality. He believes he knows better than dozens of Generals and strategists.

This same defect was revealed in Afghanistan when the decision was made to buy war lords for use in Tora Bora instead of sending coalition forces after Bin Laden. Everyone knows how well that strategy worked......

Reply to this comment

by clownsleft November 5, 2006 7:46 AM PST

Sorry for ignorance but is what rharrin1 said about bin Laden family assisting Bush companies true? I was never aware of the connection and interested in the 911 Saudi family flights.

Reply to this comment

by radiob-2009 November 5, 2006 8:32 AM PST

If you would read more than the newspapers,internet news organizations CBS,ABC,CNN and take the time to read AGAINST ALL ENEMIES and THE PRICE OF LOYALTY you would realize that Bush called a cabinet meeting 11 days into his first term and asked for a battle plan for Iraq.Also after 9/11 he told terrorist czar Richard Clarke in front of four of Clarkes collegues to find a way to pin this on Saddam.I do not know why Bush was/is so obsessed with Iraq.I know he wussed out in Afghanistan by not nuking the Taliban/Al Queda camps had he done so we would not be in Iraq or facing the problems in Iran,N.Korea,Afghanistan and Pakistan.No terrorist would be standing up be they dictator or elected or a rogue element.Hamas,Heabollah would be silent or at least restrained more than they are now.The final conclusion is that the man Bush who is supposed to be so tough is a wussy.

Reply to this comment

by bluestardad November 5, 2006 8:35 AM PST

Saddam would have been our friend now and was given arms by America in the past. Prior to the first gulf war Saddam contacted the State Department and ask permission from the U. S. before he went into Kuwait to stop their slant drilling into his Oil Fields. Kuwait was starting drilling oil on their side of the border but slanted the drills under ground to reach the oil reserves under Iraqi soil. Saddam was told by the U. S. that America wanted no part in a Middle East war hearing that he took that as an American Green Light and subsequently he invaded Kuwait. This set a domino effect in motion that led us to where we are today with thousands of American deaths and billions of tax dollars spent, The Middle East and Iraq in Chaos and millions of Iraqi and Middle East civilian deaths. Now this leader that was our friend in the Middle East is going to be hanged.

Reply to this comment

by radiob-2009 November 5, 2006 8:45 AM PST

bluestardad do you not beleive that nuking Afghanistan would have prevented this?

Reply to this comment

by grumpas November 5, 2006 9:51 AM PST

Why do people seem to think Nuking someone is the answer to all of our problems????? That doesn't make a bit of sense to me! Why kill millions of innocent people because you don't like what one or two are doing???? Nuking is the easy way out of having to listen to someone else's side to the argument! I personally have had enough of the "Terminator" antic's that got us into the mess called Iraq! I know a lot of people hated Clinton! But, he was intelligent enough to listen to these people's grievances! He was a forceful diplomat and had a little common sense! Enough common sense he didn't jump off a cliff to prove how much of a leader he was! The clown who is in office now just keeps the enemy in a state of turmoil! The mess isn't ever going to get solved until we get someone in the White House who has respect for other prople, their religious belief's and their goals! Bush is a hate mongerer! Most of us dispise him for what he has done to this great country!

Reply to this comment

by radiob-2009 November 5, 2006 10:18 AM PST

Who said anything about millions I am talking about carefully planned strategic strikes against the Taliban/Al Queda camps with limited nuclear power,not the big ones.

Reply to this comment

by radiob-2009 November 5, 2006 10:21 AM PST

No argument with you about Bush being a wuss and a divider but 9/11 did not call for diplomacy.It called for action.Iraq did not.Now we are in this civil war that will only deepen with the verdict of Saddam.A trial that should have been held in a international court seeing as how we already blundered by going in.

Reply to this comment

by rharrin1 November 5, 2006 11:21 AM PST

Anybody with any brains at all would listen to other people most of all his advisers.
But bush is so self centered he just can't do that, why is it that Powell and others quit or were fired.
If you don't agree you can't stay you forget I am the decider.

Reply to this comment

by bob_burd November 5, 2006 11:42 AM PST

Bluestardad you are obviously a Saddam lover. Doubtless if you had lived in Iraq during his bloody reign you'd have been a Baath Party stalwart.

Fools like you should join Amnesty International and go to Iraq to try and influence the country to save this wonderful man's life.

Selah

Reply to this comment

by kstrisha November 5, 2006 11:42 AM PST

Thank you guys/gals for the intelligent, informed opinions. Reading your comments is just as educational as reading the article. If there is something that I don't understand or believe, I just research it.

Reply to this comment

by rightwinglie November 5, 2006 11:51 AM PST

I am saddened by seeing the adoptive country that I love being destroyed from within, not by the actions of Al-qaeda on 9/11 but from the current administration.
The politics of fear, hatred, neighbor against neighbor and brother against brother is something that I only heard of in the context of the american civil war.
I never thought I'd live to see the day in which an attack on this country would be used to cement political and religious segregation of it's people, and used to wage war for economic gain.

Even when I did not vote for George W., I gave him my support after 9/11. I felt compeled (like most of us) to give him the chance to fight the righteous war in Afghanistan. I just could have never foreseen the lack of true leadership and the blunder after blunder after blunder coming from his cabinet.
So yes, I am saddened.

On the other hand I have no choice but to vow to fight his atrocious tactics by any pacific means, for as long as there is still such a thing as free speech in these "United" States of America, until such time as we as a people re-assert our most beloved values of honor, liberty and justice for all.
Until the time comes when we elect a government that represents all americans and not just one faction, we have no business leading the world.

Reply to this comment

by radiob-2009 November 5, 2006 12:33 PM PST

Rightwinglie absolutely correct.I am an independent and I have read neough prior to the invasion of Iraq to know that Saddam was no threat.Any if anyone has a memory shorter than a week Colin Powell had said so repeatedly before he was forced to give false info about WMD's. Colin Powell could blow the lid on the white house,former terrorist czar Richard Clarke and former treasury secretary Paul O'Neil did.Now is the time for Powell to tell all that he knows.We need leaders like him.

Reply to this comment

by nannahachisa November 5, 2006 1:19 PM PST

Thank you radiob, rightwinglie and bluestardad and many more. It's nice to see there are people out there that are not "an-eye-for-an-eye". It's time to be a "love your neighbor as yourself" country. We can do that if we are "intelligent enough to listen" etc as grumpas has stated. No leader is ever going to be perfect. But, for gdubya to purposefully set out to finish off what his daddy didn't do in Iraq, he's provided the fuel and lit the fire for all the worlds fanatics. And, he refuses to admit mistakes, refuses to listen to anyone. What can we do? Political leaders seem to only want to keep themselves and their party in power, at the expense of our/their country. I don't have an answer, all I have is frustration and sadness for our children's future.

Reply to this comment

by wayfedup November 5, 2006 4:15 PM PST

TICK TOCK TICKTOCKTICKTOCK less than 48 hours until reconstruction!!!

Reply to this comment

by mwe3wm November 5, 2006 5:31 PM PST

The one good thing about the war in Iraq. Future generations will now say, "Not Another Iraq" when referring to a failed military action. My generation is off the hook for it's politicians not providing a clear victory in a military action.

The lessons learned from both actions are leave War to the Military and not politicians.

Michael Edwards
Texas
[e-mail]

Reply to this comment

by rawehage November 5, 2006 5:34 PM PST

According to "State of Denial: Bush at War, Part III" by Bob Woodward, numerous experts before the war and in its early stages were arguing that 400,000 to 500,000 troops would be required to carry out a successful democratization of Iraq. But that would have required calling up large numbers of reserves, certain to draw ire from both parties. An emergency draft could have filled the bill, but that would have been a death sentence for republicans in 2004. So the adminsitration took their chances, and Bremer did the rest.

Reply to this comment

by mh4cbs1 November 5, 2006 9:13 PM PST

Hey Bob_Burd, who are you calling a Saddam lover!

Did you forget that Rumsfeld in the Reagan/Bush era was a Saddam lover? Saddam was one of our favortie brutal dictators. How quickly you forget. We sold him massive quantities of weapons (making big $$$ for US corporations). We helped him wage war against Iran.

Better to have left Saddam where he was. Even Richard Perle, a PNAC darth vader, agrees to that now. So maybe the US government never should have stopped loving Saddam!

Reply to this comment

by j-whitman November 5, 2006 9:54 PM PST

radiobob,,, ritht again,,, Now let's see some accountability.

Reply to this comment

by j-whitman November 5, 2006 9:56 PM PST

Speaking of dictators,,, see who we let back in power in Nicarauga??? -- Dictator Oreaga

Reply to this comment

by j-whitman November 5, 2006 9:59 PM PST

Oreaga, Ortacg, Gonzoles, Whatever,, I don't speak spaninh.

Reply to this comment

by firststate November 6, 2006 12:17 AM PST

Maybe if the 1999 wargames report had more pictures and an Elmo voice-over our fearless leader would have been able to read and understand it.

Reply to this comment

by lestb35 November 6, 2006 1:18 AM PST

Well, I'm glad we didn't send 400,000 troops and the Iraqis should be glad we got rid of the evil dictator, Saddam Hussein. It's up to the Iraqis to fight for their country's future. We can't give it to them on a silver platter. Imagine all the rebuilding they're missing out on by continuing this sectarian violence. It's a shame.

Reply to this comment

by gramto7 November 6, 2006 7:49 AM PST

Maybe our government should make the following announcement to Iraq:

Is there any group here that wishes to harm our troops? If so, we are pulling EVERYONE out! If you can control ALL your people, we will stay and help rebuild your infrastructure and get your country livable again.

I know this will not happen, but wouldn't it be wonderful if our president cared that much about the troops for which he is CIC?

Reply to this comment

by bluestardad November 6, 2006 8:53 AM PST

Heck of a Job Rummy, Stay the Course!

Reply to this comment

See all 36 Comments

Add a comment

Comment SUBMIT

Click here to add another comment.

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.

Comment reply

Submit Cancel

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.

Report offensive content:

If you believe this comment is offensive or violates the CBSNews.com Terms of Use, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the comment). Once reported, our staff will be notified and the comment will be reviewed.

Select type of offense:

Offensive: Sexually explicit or offensive language

Spam: Advertisements or commercial links

Disruptive posting: Flaming or offending other users

Illegal activities: Promote cracked software, or other illegal content

Comments (optional):

Report Cancel

E-mail this comment to a friend.

E-mail this to: (Separate multiple e-mail addresses with commas. Limited to 10 addresses.)

Your e-mail address:

Send me a copy of this message

Note: Your e-mail address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the e-mail and in case of transmission error. Neither your address nor the recipients's address will be used for any other purpose.

Add your own personal message: (Optional)

Hi, I found this user's comment on CBSNews.com and thought you might be interested in reading it. Send e-mail Cancel

[jhindson1]

So they knew the probable outcome all along. . . . .

Reckless disregard for the research and lack of due dilligence.

The Generals were right all along, and were silenced by Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld on the urging from the top of the cabal -- Cheney and Bush

[kstrisha]

Quote: "But the Desert Crossing war game in 1999 suggests we would have ended up with a failed state even with 400,000 troops on the ground."

=======

Our country is controlled by idiots...

[tnichlsn]

kstrisha - your "idiots" comment is being too kind, they are sending our kids to slaughter in Iraq, I can think of stronger words to describe them but then my comment would get 'reported'!

[juliehg-2009]

Duh!!

Goooooood Moooooorning Iraaaaak!!!

[alphaa10-2009]

More compelling evidence Bush has a singular gift for deluding himself and others, and that Rumsfeld is an egomaniac on auto-pilot. Because Rumsfeld knew of this exercise and its somber conclusions, it is entirely reasonable that he informed Bush of its negative conclusions about Iraq.

But it is impossible to suppose Bush did not know after US Army Gen. Erik Shinseki testified in public session of Congress about the military risks of Iraq and the need for massive troop levels.

Yet, as early as 2001, Bush was intent on invading Iraq-- damning the torpedoes of caution and reason. And in return for his sage and courageous warnings about Iraq, Gen. Shinseki got only pointed humiliation and browbeating from Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz, railroading him into retirement, as if to set an example to others who might stand in the way of the Bush regime.

All Bush wanted was a convincing pastiche of fear and an utterly contrived rationale of clear and present danger to US national security. Bush characteristically blamed others-- Tenet for supposed "intelligence failures" and Shinseki (via Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz) for false counsel-- rather than acknowledge it was he, alone, who fudged the facts about Iraq, and ignored his own generals and reasoned Pentagon warnings.

[alphaa10-2009]

More compelling evidence Bush has a singular gift for deluding himself and others, and that Rumsfeld is an egomaniac on auto-pilot. Because Rumsfeld knew of this exercise and its somber conclusions, it is entirely reasonable that he informed Bush of its negative conclusions about Iraq.

But it is impossible to suppose Bush did not know after US Army Gen. Erik Shinseki testified in public session of Congress about the military risks of Iraq and the need for massive troop levels.

Yet, as early as 2001, Bush was intent on invading Iraq-- damning the torpedoes of caution and reason. And in return for his sage and courageous warnings about Iraq, Gen. Shinseki got only pointed humiliation and browbeating from Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz, railroading him into retirement, as if to set an example to others who might stand in the way of the Bush regime.

All Bush wanted was a convincing pastiche of fear and an utterly contrived rationale of clear and present danger to US national security. Bush characteristically blamed others-- Tenet for supposed "intelligence failures" and Shinseki (via Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz) for false counsel-- rather than acknowledge it was he, alone, who fudged the facts about Iraq, and ignored his own generals and reasoned Pentagon warnings.

See link to original story about Gen. Shinseki-- http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/attack/consequences/2003/0228pentagoncontra.htm

[heetseeker]

Iraq and "debacle" will forever be mentioned in the same breath... I have commented in the past that the war is a classic demonstration of the arrogance of power...

Arrogance never considers consequence or implications...

As more and more information begins to trickle out about the ineptitude, incompetence and corruption surrounding the Iraqi war I am wondering whether our legislature should not undertake a thorough investigation into the rationale for going to war (who knew what, when etc) .... Clearly, we now know that the administration was far better advised and informed than first thought...

The nation needs this for its healing... & goodness knows that the nearly 3,000 US troops and the orphans, widows & widowers that have been created in the wake of this war... deserve to know the truth...

So grave are the charges being levelled against this administration and so grevious the implications of its actions... that if indeed such an investigation uncovered gross misconduct in the prosecution of this war, then I GWB should be impeached... there can be no other option...

Such an action would serve as a warning to any other administration that would so carelessly commit the nations resources to war...

The situation in Iraq is a direct result of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and the rest of the clown posse making decisions and thinking they know what's best.

The decisions should have been left to those who know what they are doing - the Generals - not those who have no idea of what they are doing.

[clownsleft]

Nicely said, Heatseeker.

Unfortunately, the ethics of the corrupt and arrogant currently in power, especially when combined with the apathy of the sheep (so well protected by the Jaineys out there) and the oversight failures of our Constitutional safeguards (Congress, the press, etc.) make any investigation just as ineffectual as those that have already been conducted.

"Proud to be an American" is no longer as easy as it used to be. Our children will nnever know the pride and trust that we all once had, as the shameful, embarrassing and criminal actions of this administration may never be overcome.

[heetseeker]

mcdazz

I guess what I am thinking is that there are two types of investigation... the ones that took place before next Tuesday and the ones that will take place after next Tuesday... if you get my drift?

My only hope is that any new investigation is focused on uncovering the truth in a balanced non-partisan way... the investigation must be fully bi-partisan, open & transparent... we cannot afford to play politics, whilst our young men & women are being slaughtered on foreign fields...

If we truly want to honour our fallen (which is the constant refrain of this administration)... let them know why they died so that their loved ones may have peace...

I would not want to pre-judge the outcomes of any new investigation... but based an the drip-drip of new revelations coming out about pre-war preparation and planning... it will surely uncover failures at the highest levels of Government, destroy reputations & discredit ideologies...

Iraq has become a poisonous sore... and a cancer at the heart of our nation... for this, sun-light is the best disinfectant..

[rharrin1]

I have been saying this all along. OIL OIL OIL
Check bush it's oil all oil his company did not do good the bin laden family dumped money into it to keep it from bankruptcy the port deal it's all over oil

[exusmcsgt]

This is more confirmation of Rumsfeld's tendency to see the world according to Rumsfeld as opposed to reality. He believes he knows better than dozens of Generals and strategists.

This same defect was revealed in Afghanistan when the decision was made to buy war lords for use in Tora Bora instead of sending coalition forces after Bin Laden. Everyone knows how well that strategy worked......

[clownsleft]

Sorry for ignorance but is what rharrin1 said about bin Laden family assisting Bush companies true? I was never aware of the connection and interested in the 911 Saudi family flights.

[radiob-2009]

If you would read more than the newspapers,internet news organizations CBS,ABC,CNN and take the time to read AGAINST ALL ENEMIES and THE PRICE OF LOYALTY you would realize that Bush called a cabinet meeting 11 days into his first term and asked for a battle plan for Iraq.Also after 9/11 he told terrorist czar Richard Clarke in front of four of Clarkes collegues to find a way to pin this on Saddam.I do not know why Bush was/is so obsessed with Iraq.I know he wussed out in Afghanistan by not nuking the Taliban/Al Queda camps had he done so we would not be in Iraq or facing the problems in Iran,N.Korea,Afghanistan and Pakistan.No terrorist would be standing up be they dictator or elected or a rogue element.Hamas,Heabollah would be silent or at least restrained more than they are now.The final conclusion is that the man Bush who is supposed to be so tough is a wussy.

[bluestardad]

Saddam would have been our friend now and was given arms by America in the past. Prior to the first gulf war Saddam contacted the State Department and ask permission from the U. S. before he went into Kuwait to stop their slant drilling into his Oil Fields. Kuwait was starting drilling oil on their side of the border but slanted the drills under ground to reach the oil reserves under Iraqi soil. Saddam was told by the U. S. that America wanted no part in a Middle East war hearing that he took that as an American Green Light and subsequently he invaded Kuwait. This set a domino effect in motion that led us to where we are today with thousands of American deaths and billions of tax dollars spent, The Middle East and Iraq in Chaos and millions of Iraqi and Middle East civilian deaths. Now this leader that was our friend in the Middle East is going to be hanged.

[radiob-2009]

bluestardad do you not beleive that nuking Afghanistan would have prevented this?

[grumpas]

Why do people seem to think Nuking someone is the answer to all of our problems????? That doesn't make a bit of sense to me! Why kill millions of innocent people because you don't like what one or two are doing???? Nuking is the easy way out of having to listen to someone else's side to the argument! I personally have had enough of the "Terminator" antic's that got us into the mess called Iraq! I know a lot of people hated Clinton! But, he was intelligent enough to listen to these people's grievances! He was a forceful diplomat and had a little common sense! Enough common sense he didn't jump off a cliff to prove how much of a leader he was! The clown who is in office now just keeps the enemy in a state of turmoil! The mess isn't ever going to get solved until we get someone in the White House who has respect for other prople, their religious belief's and their goals! Bush is a hate mongerer! Most of us dispise him for what he has done to this great country!

[radiob-2009]

Who said anything about millions I am talking about carefully planned strategic strikes against the Taliban/Al Queda camps with limited nuclear power,not the big ones.

[radiob-2009]

No argument with you about Bush being a wuss and a divider but 9/11 did not call for diplomacy.It called for action.Iraq did not.Now we are in this civil war that will only deepen with the verdict of Saddam.A trial that should have been held in a international court seeing as how we already blundered by going in.

[rharrin1]

Anybody with any brains at all would listen to other people most of all his advisers.
But bush is so self centered he just can't do that, why is it that Powell and others quit or were fired.
If you don't agree you can't stay you forget I am the decider.

[bob_burd]

Bluestardad you are obviously a Saddam lover. Doubtless if you had lived in Iraq during his bloody reign you'd have been a Baath Party stalwart.

Fools like you should join Amnesty International and go to Iraq to try and influence the country to save this wonderful man's life.

Selah

[kstrisha]

Thank you guys/gals for the intelligent, informed opinions. Reading your comments is just as educational as reading the article. If there is something that I don't understand or believe, I just research it.

[rightwinglie]

I am saddened by seeing the adoptive country that I love being destroyed from within, not by the actions of Al-qaeda on 9/11 but from the current administration.
The politics of fear, hatred, neighbor against neighbor and brother against brother is something that I only heard of in the context of the american civil war.
I never thought I'd live to see the day in which an attack on this country would be used to cement political and religious segregation of it's people, and used to wage war for economic gain.

Even when I did not vote for George W., I gave him my support after 9/11. I felt compeled (like most of us) to give him the chance to fight the righteous war in Afghanistan. I just could have never foreseen the lack of true leadership and the blunder after blunder after blunder coming from his cabinet.
So yes, I am saddened.

On the other hand I have no choice but to vow to fight his atrocious tactics by any pacific means, for as long as there is still such a thing as free speech in these "United" States of America, until such time as we as a people re-assert our most beloved values of honor, liberty and justice for all.
Until the time comes when we elect a government that represents all americans and not just one faction, we have no business leading the world.

[radiob-2009]

Rightwinglie absolutely correct.I am an independent and I have read neough prior to the invasion of Iraq to know that Saddam was no threat.Any if anyone has a memory shorter than a week Colin Powell had said so repeatedly before he was forced to give false info about WMD's. Colin Powell could blow the lid on the white house,former terrorist czar Richard Clarke and former treasury secretary Paul O'Neil did.Now is the time for Powell to tell all that he knows.We need leaders like him.

[nannahachisa]

Thank you radiob, rightwinglie and bluestardad and many more. It's nice to see there are people out there that are not "an-eye-for-an-eye". It's time to be a "love your neighbor as yourself" country. We can do that if we are "intelligent enough to listen" etc as grumpas has stated. No leader is ever going to be perfect. But, for gdubya to purposefully set out to finish off what his daddy didn't do in Iraq, he's provided the fuel and lit the fire for all the worlds fanatics. And, he refuses to admit mistakes, refuses to listen to anyone. What can we do? Political leaders seem to only want to keep themselves and their party in power, at the expense of our/their country. I don't have an answer, all I have is frustration and sadness for our children's future.

[wayfedup]

TICK TOCK TICKTOCKTICKTOCK less than 48 hours until reconstruction!!!

[mwe3wm]

The one good thing about the war in Iraq. Future generations will now say, "Not Another Iraq" when referring to a failed military action. My generation is off the hook for it's politicians not providing a clear victory in a military action.

The lessons learned from both actions are leave War to the Military and not politicians.

Michael Edwards
Texas
[e-mail]

[rawehage]

According to "State of Denial: Bush at War, Part III" by Bob Woodward, numerous experts before the war and in its early stages were arguing that 400,000 to 500,000 troops would be required to carry out a successful democratization of Iraq. But that would have required calling up large numbers of reserves, certain to draw ire from both parties. An emergency draft could have filled the bill, but that would have been a death sentence for republicans in 2004. So the adminsitration took their chances, and Bremer did the rest.

[mh4cbs1]

Hey Bob_Burd, who are you calling a Saddam lover!

Did you forget that Rumsfeld in the Reagan/Bush era was a Saddam lover? Saddam was one of our favortie brutal dictators. How quickly you forget. We sold him massive quantities of weapons (making big $$$ for US corporations). We helped him wage war against Iran.

Better to have left Saddam where he was. Even Richard Perle, a PNAC darth vader, agrees to that now. So maybe the US government never should have stopped loving Saddam!

[j-whitman]

radiobob,,, ritht again,,, Now let's see some accountability.

[j-whitman]

Speaking of dictators,,, see who we let back in power in Nicarauga??? -- Dictator Oreaga

[j-whitman]

Oreaga, Ortacg, Gonzoles, Whatever,, I don't speak spaninh.

[firststate]

Maybe if the 1999 wargames report had more pictures and an Elmo voice-over our fearless leader would have been able to read and understand it.

[lestb35]

Well, I'm glad we didn't send 400,000 troops and the Iraqis should be glad we got rid of the evil dictator, Saddam Hussein. It's up to the Iraqis to fight for their country's future. We can't give it to them on a silver platter. Imagine all the rebuilding they're missing out on by continuing this sectarian violence. It's a shame.

[gramto7]

Maybe our government should make the following announcement to Iraq:

Is there any group here that wishes to harm our troops? If so, we are pulling EVERYONE out! If you can control ALL your people, we will stay and help rebuild your infrastructure and get your country livable again.

I know this will not happen, but wouldn't it be wonderful if our president cared that much about the troops for which he is CIC?

[bluestardad]

Heck of a Job Rummy, Stay the Course!