Bitterness

George Friedman is pretty bitter about the attacks on the Iraq War coming from all sides occasioned by the 20th anniversary of the invasion. Here’s his conclusion:

Invading Afghanistan and Iraq was the only practical option if the goal was to cripple a very capable enemy. The U.S. launched broad attacks in multiple countries. This could provoke hostility, but there was no better option. It was an unconventional counteroffensive, and this is what its critics dislike, but they offer no clear alternative. After 9/11, the threat was simply too great. The strategy was worldwide disruption. It was not pretty, but it worked. There were no other large-scale attacks on the U.S. homeland.

I find that a flood of illogic. Iraq was not a threat. Repeat: it wasn’t a threat. It didn’t harbor Al Qaeda until we removed Saddam Hussein. Furthermore, we have clearly failed in Afghanistan. If invading Iraq and Afghanistan were our only options against a “very capable enemy”, why has failure been an acceptable option in both countries?

I would like to suggest to Mr. Friedman that Al Qaeda was not the threat; our own laziness and carelessness were the threats. They are still threats. Al Qaeda was not a “very capable enemy”. They got lucky. Evidence: we have had no successful mass attacks by Al Qaeda since 9/11. Mr. Friedman’s interpretation is that’s because we invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. That sounds like the tiger repellent argument to me.

This is not 20-20 hindsight on my part. I’ve been saying all of this for 20 years. The evidence that I was right continues to mount.

3 comments… add one
  • bob sykes Link

    The disinformation regarding al-Daesh/ISIS is rampant. There are many branches of them, and some of them are the creation of and tools of the US. This certainly the case in Syria, where we actively protect ISIS and al-Nusra.

    A few years ago, before the ISIS leadership tried for independence, we allowed them to steal and export Syrian oil through Turkey. Erdogan’s family was in on the scam. Russia stopped that. Nowadays, the US, itself, steals and exports the oil, but the main al-Daesh/ISIS camp is only few miles from our main base at al-Tanf, and we supply them with logistics and transport.

    Recently, we moved a contingent of ISIS to Afghanistan.

    Some older readers will remember that in the 80’s we helped setup, trained, and funded the Taliban in order to overthrow the native communist regime there. Osama bin Laden was a participant in that struggle, on the Taliban side.

    It is estimated (by the Lancet and others) that the US has killed as many as 1 million noncombatant Afghan and Iraqi civilians. We used to regularly attack birthday parties, weddings, and funerals that we thought jihadis might attend.

    George Friedman is a war criminal, in exactly the same sense that Hitler, Himmler, Tojo, Yamamoto and their allies were. Washington is filled to the brim with war criminals. Even now there is ongoing a very heavy handed psyop campaign to start a war with China, even though our proxy war with Russia is ongoing.

  • William Link

    Thanks for the Post Dave, a timely topic and I certainly agree with your comments and Bob’s.

  • Zachriel Link

    « C’est pire qu’un crime; c’est une faute. »

    Great military power is characterized by the ability to strike when and where it wants. The Romans had their roads, which their legions could travel to attack wherever they wanted. The Mongols had the Steppes, a sea of grass upon which they could feed their armies and travel from one end of Asia to the other. The British Empire controlled the seas and could go where they please and strike where they please. The Americans in WWII controlled the skies and could rain ruin on their adversaries.

    The Gulf War and the nimble attack on Afghanistan exemplify this. But, as in Vietnam, once the United States became bogged down, it lost that agility. The insurgents could bide their time, study the occupiers, and find chinks in their armor.

Leave a Comment