Chalabi Says, 'The Real Culprit is Wolfowitz'

[Scrum]

'NYT' Sunday Preview: Ahmad Chalabi Says, 'The Real Culprit is Wolfowitz'

NEW YORK So, Ahmad Chalabi, what went wrong in Iraq in the war you helped to sell? “The Americans sold us out,” he tells longtime Baghdad reporter Dexter Filkins in a lengthy cover story in this coming Sunday’s New York Times Magazine, reviewed by E&P.

Chalabi was the Iraqi exile who worked -- via everyone from Paul Wolfowitz to Judith Miller -- to convince America to topple Saddam in 2003 (not that many in the administration needed much convincing).

Now, in an interview in his London home, Chalabi, betraying what Filkins calls “a touch of bitterness,” declares, “The real culprit in all this is Wolfowitz,” the former assistant secretary of defense, whom he still considers a friend. “They chickened out. The Pentagon guys chickened out…The Americans screwed it up.”

But that’s not because they did too little but, rather, too much. Chalabi thinks the U.S. should have exited quickly and turned things over to Iraqis, such as himself and Moktada al-Sadr. “It was a puppet show!" he says referring to the occupation. “The worst of all worlds. We were in charge, and we had no power.”

He adds: “America betrays its friends. It sets them up and betrays them. I’d rather be America’s enemy.”

Yikes. He says we should have left earlier. That sound familiar to anyone else?

This also ins't the first time someone has been critical of Wolfowitz in all this. I hope these clowns get us back on track soon, other wise we are going to have an even bigger mess to clean up.

[DosEquis]

Wolfowitz was also one of the main authors of the "bush doctrine" which was actually written in the early 1990s. Parts of that doctrine was considered to radical in the 1990s until 3000 people died and we were scared into needing it. He is one of the key players at PNAC also.

[lew]

Wolfowitz is THE man behind neoconservatism.

[KatKanPlay]

Wasnt Chalabi one of the main sources of intellegence that pretty much guaranteed WMD's? Neither Germany or France joined the coalition because they said Chalabi wasnt to be trusted.?.

[avsp]

Chelabi is a bit like the Karl Malden character in the film 'Billion Dolar Brain'

Either way when he arrived in Iraq the public attitude towards him was pretty much 'Who the f*ck are you?'

as an aside i see various neo-con types are bickering about whose fault it is in 'Vanity Fair', (of all places), Neo Culpa: Politics & Power: vanityfair.com but i assume this has already been aired here during my abscence. But its only a teaser article as of now

[mididoctors]

Originally Posted by avsp

Chelabi is a bit like the Karl Malden character in the film 'Billion Dolar Brain'

props to that

as an aside i see various neo-con types are bickering about whose fault it is in 'Vanity Fair', (of all places), Neo Culpa: Politics & Power: vanityfair.com but i assume this has already been aired here during my abscence. But its only a teaser article as of now

Frumm was on radio 4 complaining he was taken out of context. Pearle is extraordinary in having the gaul to say anything what so ever given his involvement.

given what they did the biggest favour they can do for the american people and the world is to confess their intentions and lies as a root cause of this debacle as a process of cleansing the political debate.

Boris
London

[avsp]

Re: Vanity Fair article

Rubin has responded, claiming that he spoke on the promise that the article wouldnt appear before the mid-terms. & generally moaning about the partisan nature of US politics & pointing out that Iraq is bigger than that, ..., all of which I'd agree with
The Corner on National Review Online

Meanwhile Frum has done likewise, whilst standing by everything he said he decries VF for their partisanship, ..., "They have repackaged truths that a war-fighting country needs to hear into lies intended to achieve a shabby partisan purpose"
The Blog | David Frum: <i>Vanity Fair</i>'s Inventions | The Huffington Post

Were I more familiar with his views & given his statements about the point of LITERALLY putting words into the mouths of others then I'd be tempted to award him quite a few bonus points

[avsp]

I have, as I'm sure many of you know, always been a big fan of pointing out the incredible stupidity & arrogance of D Rumsfeld esq

I've especially been keen on pointing out the idiocy of his doctrinaire & inappropriate position on force mix/size that was heavily criticised before hand & was seen worldwide as obviously flawed within days of the regime falling.

So heres a further news story that shows the poverty of his position

Originally Posted by ap sourced article @CNN

War simulation in 1999 pointed out Iraq invasion problems
POSTED: 10:15 p.m. EST, November 4, 2006

WASHINGTON (AP) -- [b]A series of secret U.S. war games in 1999 showed that an invasion and post-war administration of Iraq would require 400,000 troops, nearly three times the number there now].

And even then, the games showed, the country still had a chance of dissolving into chaos.

In the simulation, called Desert Crossing, 70 military, diplomatic and intelligence participants concluded 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 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 about 144,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, down from a peak in January of about 160,000.

A week after the invasion, in March 2003, the Pentagon said there were 250,000 U.S. ground force troops inside Iraq, along with 40,000 coalition force troops.

A spokeswoman for the 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.

News of the war games results comes a day before judges are expected to deliver a verdict in Saddam Hussein war crimes trial.

The war games looked at "worst case" and "most likely" scenarios after a war that removed then-Iraqi President Saddam Hussein from power. Some of the conclusions 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."

War simulation in 1999 pointed out Iraq invasion problems - CNN.com

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by avsp

I have, as I'm sure many of you know, always been a big fan of pointing out the incredible stupidity & arrogance of D Rumsfeld esq

I've especially been keen on pointing out the idiocy of his doctrinaire & inappropriate position on force mix/size that was heavily criticised before hand & was seen worldwide as obviously flawed within days of the regime falling.

So heres a further news story that shows the poverty of his position


War simulation in 1999 pointed out Iraq invasion problems - CNN.com

Ouch.

[avsp]

its not funny & i should be lambasted for framing my point in such a self-agrandising fashion