Iraq war was badly planned, says (UK) Army

Source: Daily Telegraph

A leaked internal Army report has delivered an unprecedented attack on the planning and execution of the war in Iraq.

The document, which openly condemns British and US foreign policy, says that "leaders should not start an operation without thinking through the options and implications of their plans".

...

"The evidence shows that too little planning was done for Operation Telic (the codename for the war in Iraq) particularly on the non-military side, and that too few resources, both human and financial were allocated to the post-war situation," it says.

...

Instead, the document, which is part of a wider study called Theme Zero, says that the "Army has a duty to learn from experience". The report states:

• The British headquarters suffered from a lack of good quality officers

• Lack of planning put Britain and the US, as occupying powers, in "breach" of the Geneva Convention

• Lack of planning resulted in delays before essential reconstruction could begin

• Not enough funding was requested by senior commanders or approved by the Treasury

• British commanders were forced to work to an ideologically driven US timetable

• Restrictive operational security meant that few people in Government were involved in planning.


Read more: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/11/04/niraq104.xml

Geez, Obviousville Tribune and Chronicle from 4 years ago called. They want their news flash back.

But there are some 300+ million others in the USA who got the news already.

Thanks all the same!

:evilgrin:

They still think that what we should do is correct the bad planning and
otherwise change nothing. I have an idea--make the 25% identify themselves,
send THEIR children, and pay for it with THEIR taxes.

Think THAT might give them a clue?

nahhh, I guess not.

It was planned? Who knew?

It should read: Iraq war was barely planned.


Kurtz: "Are my methods are unsound?"
Willard: "I don't see any method at all, sir."


Where is Willard when you need him?


My Favorite Master Artist: Karen Parker GhostWoman Studios

Imagine this: The US gets attacked by a coalition of nations who want control over or access to the oilfields.
Then, after more than one million deaths caused by the war, damages to your industry and infrastructure in
the multi-billion dollar range (without that the attacking nations have paid one cent of reparations) a big
newspaper in one of the attacking nations calls the war not a crime or a mistake, but 'poorly planned'.

What would your reaction be?

and base your policies upon them,


Document reveals Nixon plan to seize Arab oil fields
'70s embargo sparked 'last resort' measure, says British memo
by Lizette Alvarez, New York Times

Friday, January 2, 2004

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/01/02/MNG8G427D61.DTL

The part about British intelligence saying that ten years of occupation would be necessary (2003-2013, anyone ?) shows us why Tim Russert pressed the Dem candidates on this in a recent debate.

Duh.

Duh!:eyes:

If the objective was massive and continuous profits for multinational oil companies, the war is going every bit according to plan and has been a huge victory.

or are they dumb.