Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

LEAKED: 2003 Memo Indicates Blair Envoy Felt US Postwar Stragegy=DISASTER!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-14-06 07:41 AM
Original message
LEAKED: 2003 Memo Indicates Blair Envoy Felt US Postwar Stragegy=DISASTER!
Leaked: Blair envoy said US Iraq strategy 'complete mess'
A leaked memo from 2003 indicates that Blair's aides felt postwar strategy was a disaster. 'We may have been seduced into something we might be inclined to regret.'

US postwar Iraq strategy a mess, Blair was told

Ewen MacAskill, diplomatic editor
Tuesday March 14, 2006
The Guardian


Senior British diplomatic and military staff gave Tony Blair explicit warnings three years ago that the US was disastrously mishandling the occupation of Iraq, according to leaked memos.

John Sawers, Mr Blair's envoy in Baghdad in the aftermath of the invasion, sent a series of confidential memos to Downing Street in May and June 2003 cataloguing US failures. With unusual frankness, he described the US postwar administration, led by the retired general Jay Garner, as "an unbelievable mess" and said "Garner and his top team of 60-year-old retired generals" were "well-meaning but out of their depth".

.........................

The memos were obtained by Michael Gordon, author, along with General Bernard Trainor, of Cobra II: the Inside Story of the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq, published to coincide with the third anniversary of the invasion.

The British memos identified a series of US failures that contained the seeds of the present insurgency and anarchy.

The mistakes include:

· A lack of interest by the US commander, General Tommy Franks, in the post-invasion phase.

· The presence in the capital of the US Third Infantry Division, which took a heavyhanded approach to security.

· Squandering the initial sympathy of Iraqis.

· Bechtel, the main US civilian contractor, moving too slowly to reconnect basic services, such as electricity and water.

· Failure to deal with health hazards, such as 40% of Baghdad's sewage pouring into the Tigris and rubbish piling up in the streets.

· Sacking of many of Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath party, even though many of them held relatively junior posts.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1730427,00.html
via:http://www.rawstory.com/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-14-06 07:43 AM
Response to Original message
1. "may have been".. "might be inclined to regret"
oh brother..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-14-06 07:46 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. typical brit stuffy upper liposuction. It is not what they say, but how.
Still, sure seems as though their analysis was "spot on, mate". Pity our MSM was seduced by Bremer and his direct boss, Condi Rice.

Again, why does the media ignore the fact that condi was in charge of the reconstruction when it did its worst?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoYouEverWonder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-14-06 07:45 AM
Response to Original message
2. But I thought their god told them
everything was great?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DanCa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-14-06 07:45 AM
Response to Original message
3. The more I know of this war the more I hate it.
I just can't stand the chimp. The scarey thing is that despite all we know people are still supporting the man monkey. What's it going to take to get rid of King George?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HereSince1628 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-14-06 07:55 AM
Response to Original message
5. Big deal. This will have zero effect in the US and not much more
than that in the UK.

Seems to me like a lame CYA attempt...a way for some of the folks around Downing Street to say they weren't all stupid. Which says nothing about their misplaced loyalties and failures to speak in a timely manner when it might have done some good.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mend Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-14-06 08:06 AM
Response to Original message
6. See, it wasn't "going to war" that was bad, just "mistakes made"
setting up the peace. I am starting to hear this theme and it is outrageous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 04:23 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC