Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ultimate Newbie
Planning for the occupation would have resulted in far more initial reconstruction of basic services such as water and electricity as you would have planned to have brigades of engineers ready to go as soon as the conventional army had been defeated in an area.
|
The US set aside a porportionally tiny amount for reconstruction, funding for iraqi reconstruction has now ceased. They wouldn't have spent any more money regardless of the situation on the ground, there was a finite amount set aside for rebuilding, what makes you think money would magically appear without attacks on the coalition?
Quote:
snip
I mean, if these things are obvious to me, what are those staff and flag officers who spend months/years planning these things doing?!'
|
Do you honestly think the iraqis are fighting the british and americans because we didn't spend enough on rebuilding the infrastructure after we bombed and impossed sanctions on them for 12 years?!?!! Or that things would be different if we 'planned more'?!?
If Iraq bombed the shit out of us and impossed sanctions for 12 years before invading britain no amount of 'planning' on their part could stop me killing every last one of them if i got the chance. We sided with saddam when it suited us, we ****ed with iraq as and when we wanted, what plans could possibly make things any different?!?!
To reiterate what i said 'mein leader we shall free the people with freedom but must plan to stop them resisting' and since dante already brought up wwii; do you honestly believe that the nazis could have conquered france without meeting any post occupation resistance if only they had 'planned better'?
We're in the same absurd position as vietnam. How can you bring a people 'freedom' if a large portion of them are willing to kill themselves to get you out? They aren't becoming martyrs for electricity but because they want
freedom from us
Post occupation planning wouldn't have stopped an insurgency.
We're the bad guys