Documents Show U.S. War Game in 1999 Predicted Iraq Disaster

mkpdavies · 05-11-2006, 09:16 PM

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/ea..._id=1003352553

Quote:

WASHINGTON 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.

"Shock and Awe" was supposed to trump this. :roll:

mkpdavies · 05-11-2006, 09:25 PM

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world...940015,00.html

Quote:

President George Bush faces a damaging political firestorm on the eve of the vital mid-term elections after it emerged yesterday that an influential military newspaper is to call for the resignation of his Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld.
The call could not come at a worse time for Bush and the Republican party as they brace for a widely predicted defeat in Tuesday's elections that could see the Democrats capture both Houses of Congress.

Now it has been revealed that the Military Times Media Group, which publishes the army newspaper The Army Times, is to print an anti-Rumsfeld editorial tomorrow.

'Regardless of which party wins [the mid-term elections on 7 November] the time has come, Mr President, to face the hard bruising truth: Donald Rumsfeld must go,' it will conclude.

How much does a "leader" have to **** up to be held to account these days?

Brandy · 09-11-2006, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkpdavies

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,1940015,00.html

Quote:

President George Bush faces a damaging political firestorm on the eve of the vital mid-term elections after it emerged yesterday that an influential military newspaper is to call for the resignation of his Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld.
The call could not come at a worse time for Bush and the Republican party as they brace for a widely predicted defeat in Tuesday's elections that could see the Democrats capture both Houses of Congress.

Now it has been revealed that the Military Times Media Group, which publishes the army newspaper The Army Times, is to print an anti-Rumsfeld editorial tomorrow.

'Regardless of which party wins [the mid-term elections on 7 November] the time has come, Mr President, to face the hard bruising truth: Donald Rumsfeld must go,' it will conclude.

How much does a "leader" have to f*** up to be held to account these days?

so he's not a puppet then?

Aardvark · 09-11-2006, 03:35 PM

Rumsfeld's gone- no doubt to a think tank sinecure somewhere.

As George Galloway pointed out, Rumsfeld met with Saddam Hussein on a number of occasions and might well have been responsible for keeping him in power by selling him arms!

At the height of the security crisis during the British Mandate in Palestine we had 100,000 troops for an area considerably smaller than Iraq and with a fraction of the number of people. We left in an ignominious fashion and the power vacuum was filled by the Zionists after a bloody war, the results of which are still with us today.

When the west abandons Iraq we will see the same sort of chaos with the same percentage of deaths or more. The Jews lost 1% of their population in 1948, the Arabs lost more people and hundreds of thousands fled their homes. Iraq will partition, there will be horrendous ethnic cleansing and the atrocities will bring tears to all of our eyes. Mass beheadings are already commonplace. Rape of opponents womenfolk is usual. Kidnappings are out of control.

I'd guess, if the Yugoslav or Afghan figures are anything to go by, that over 1 million people will die violently in Iraq in the next 10 years. I'd love to be proven wrong.

Mikeuk · 10-11-2006, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aardvark

Rumsfeld's gone- no doubt to a think tank sinecure somewhere.

The best place for Scumfeld would be the end of a noose. If Saddam Hussein deserves hanging for killing whoever it is he's supposed to have killed, major war criminal Scumfeld deserves death ten times over.

Bush's disjointed performance on TV was hilarious. With his usual stupid quizzical look on his face Monkey Boy spluttered and fluffed his lines as if a Black Cat Thunderbolt rocket had just exploded up his arsehole.

I only wish I could vote for Hillary Clinton to get rid of that moronic scumbag.

I had my nephew staying here last week The kid found my Bush farting doll and wouldn't let up letting it off. Eventually I told him he could keep it (not a popular decision with his parents)

I'm missing little George. I think I'll have to order another. :twisted:

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

09-11-2006, 03:35 PM	#4 (permalink)
Aardvark Moderator Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Oxonia Posts: 3,928	Rumsfeld's gone- no doubt to a think tank sinecure somewhere. As George Galloway pointed out, Rumsfeld met with Saddam Hussein on a number of occasions and might well have been responsible for keeping him in power by selling him arms! At the height of the security crisis during the British Mandate in Palestine we had 100,000 troops for an area considerably smaller than Iraq and with a fraction of the number of people. We left in an ignominious fashion and the power vacuum was filled by the Zionists after a bloody war, the results of which are still with us today. When the west abandons Iraq we will see the same sort of chaos with the same percentage of deaths or more. The Jews lost 1% of their population in 1948, the Arabs lost more people and hundreds of thousands fled their homes. Iraq will partition, there will be horrendous ethnic cleansing and the atrocities will bring tears to all of our eyes. Mass beheadings are already commonplace. Rape of opponents womenfolk is usual. Kidnappings are out of control. I'd guess, if the Yugoslav or Afghan figures are anything to go by, that over 1 million people will die violently in Iraq in the next 10 years. I'd love to be proven wrong.