Every year I try and see as many of the Oscar Nominated movies as I can before the big show.  This year one of those is the movie "No End In Sight" which is up for best documentary feature.  All I can say is every person in America should watch this movie.

This movie will open your eyes as to what is happening in Iraq and why it happened. 

I'm always a bit skeptical when it comes to Documentaries, because it can be easy to create propaganda films.  Get the right people to say the right things and you have your message.  What impresses me about this documentary, is that they have the people from the Bush Administration, who were in Iraq telling the story.

What is sad about this film, is that it shows when we went into Iraq the people were happy that we took out Saddam.  However, in the months and years to follow we did not do what we knew needed to happen.  We did not let the military secure the country.  We did not enforce marshal law, to prevent looting and anarchy.  We did not set up a system to allow the Iraq people to govern themselves.  Instead of putting the people to work, we brought in American contractors, which led to not only thousands of Iraq's without jobs but costing the American taxpayers more money as American contractors cost more money.  Instead of training and using the Iraq military to help police the country we disbanded them putting thousands of men with guns into the streets with no job and no future.

This movie does not touch the politics of if we should have gone to war in the first place.  What it does show is that the policies of Rumsfield and Cheney led to the present state of Iraq.  It baffles me, because Republicans are supposed to know how to go to war.  Let the Marines secure  the country, put in place a provisional government, give the people hope, put them to work.

Vietnam was supposed to have taught us never to politicize war again.  Make sure you have a plan, not only to take over the country, but to have a plan in place once you do. It seems like our military knew what needed to be done, but once again the people in Washington got in the way. The most telling part is when they showed how American planned for two years about how we would set up Japan once we took over.  For Iraq we gave our planners 60 days. 

I encourage you to watch this movie and let us all know what you think.

Have you ever heard of 'Monday Morning Quarterbacking'? It's always easy to point out the mistakes that were made in the past, because you know the result of what was done. It's even not that hard to give solutions for the problems of today, but it is too late to implement those solutions. (Big problems take months, if not years, to solve, even if you know the solution) If you want to impress me, tell me the solutions to the problems that we don't even know exist yet. Impossible, you say? Welcome to life as President.

redcity8:

Have you ever heard of 'Monday Morning Quarterbacking'? It's always easy to point out the mistakes that were made in the past, because you know the result of what was done. It's even not that hard to give solutions for the problems of today, but it is too late to implement those solutions. (Big problems take months, if not years, to solve, even if you know the solution) If you want to impress me, tell me the solutions to the problems that we don't even know exist yet. Impossible, you say? Welcome to life as President.

Have you watched the movie?  I would say Monday Morning Quarterbacking is one thing, this is something completely different. 

This is like looking at a stack of blocks that used to form a tower, and now they are scattered all over the floor.  Why are the blocks all over the floor?  Well ask the man who was put in charge of guarding the blocks.  He says his boss took out the bottom red block.

Did your boss ask you if he should take out the bottom red block?  No.  Would you have taken out the bottom red block? No.  Why did you let your boss take out the bottom red block?  I didn't know he was going to, he just did it.  I wish I had known I would have told him not to.

Sure it's a simple dumbed down analogy.  However, I would think that not taking out the bottom red block is not Monday Morning Quarterbacking, it's more like common sense.

In the case of Iraq, I would think setting up some sort of police force is common sense, not letting the people go into anarchy is common sense.  Sending in enough troops to secure the country is common sense.  Waiting until you have a plan with what to do with Iraq before you go in is common sense.  Giving the people of the country jobs to rebuild the country is common sense.  Giving the thousands of men in the military who feed their families with their army jobs something to do, instead of sending them home with no job, as their families starve, and they have all the guns still, and pressure by extreme Muslims to join them in the fight against you was probably not a good idea.

Maybe I'm wrong though.  Can you tell me what I've said in the previous paragraph is Monday Morning Quarterbacking, and what is common sense, in your opinion.  Maybe you are right.

 

.

 I won't get into a protracted discussion on the Iraq War, cause anyone that has taken a position (on just about anything) will defend it to the death. But just to touch on the specific 'complaints' you mentioned:

 "Setting up some sort of police force" This one is just embarrassing; Don't you read the news? This has been one of the ongoing problems in Iraq - The police are subject to more attacks then the Americans are.There is a constant recruitment effort, and the lines of people that want to sign up are one of the prime targets of bombers. I can't judge the success, but there is definitely a lot of effort to build the police.

"Sending in enough troops to secure the country" There's only three things wrong with that statement : First, how could you judge how many would be needed, before the fact? It all depends on the level of unrest, which was unpredictable. Second, without the use of Iraqi Forces, there are not enough troops in the entire US Armed Forces to 'secure' a country the size of Iraq. And Third, If we did come up with enough Military to control the country with an "Iron Fist'----why would we EVER leave? The concept was we were 'rescuing' Iraq - not conquering it.

"Waiting until you have a plan with what to do with Iraq before you go in" Despite what you may have been told, we had a plan, probably several plans - But one of the truisms of war is that EVERY plan is outdated the instant the war starts. Every war (and especially this one) is a very complicated and unpredictable affair. Not only in WHAT happens, but the LEVEL of every event.

"Giving people jobs to rebuild their country" Again, do you read the news? Helping rebuild the country is seen as helping the Americans, everyone that does is subject to being killed. There are other complications with that idea. One is sabotage. The other is: Do you hire a hundred Iraqi to rebuild, say, a school house.( Takes six months and they do a fair job), or do you bring in an American construction company. ( Takes six weeks and they do a great job) Personally, I would say that hiring the Iraqi would be the right choice, but you can't say that the other choice would be unreasonable.

"Sending the Iraqi army home etc" Yeah, thats a good one. Probably the dumbest move I've ever seen. But I'm sure the guy that made that decision thought that he had a good reason for it.

 In summation, Monday Morning Quarterbacking means that you have already seen what DIDN'T work, how previous actions turned out, exactly what and when mistakes were made. And that is exactly what you and every other critic of the war is doing.

Sorry to say this redcity8, but you really need to watch the documentary.  For one all your points refuting what I said, have to do with the situation on the ground now, not back when we first invaded.

cause anyone that has taken a position (on just about anything) will defend it to the death.  That is wrong.  I was for the war when we first went in.  I believed what the administration was saying.  To tell you the truth, right now I'm for the surge.  Things finally started getting better once Rumsfield was booted out of power.

I'm not going to go through your post point by point.  But I will say that a lot of what you are saying is actually in the movie.  It's spoken by Rumsfield.  I encourage you to rent it, if you have Netflix it's actually available for free in their Watch Now section.  I think it's a very important movie.

As Abraham Lincoln said, "Those we do not learn from [Monday Morning Quarterbacking] history are doomed to repeat it". 

You are obviously quite impressed with that 'documentary'. You need to realize that just because someone has the ability and desire to 'make a movie', that action does not legitimize anything that is said within that movie. It contains clips of Rumsfelt? Yep. Taken out of context, without HIS explaination of what he meant? Yep, again.

My rebuttal is about current events? Not entirely. What I said about no plan lasts beyond the start of a war refers to anything after the first shot. Expanding on that: If no 'pre-war' plan will endure past the beginning of  a war, there really isn't much reason for detailed 'pre-war' plans, is there?

You didn't clearly deny the 'Monday Morning Quarterback' charge in your last post, but I'll reply as if you did: If you knew all the answers to all the hard questions before the war, (without the benefit of knowing what results actual actions had, thats the MMQ) , then you should have spoken up then......Of course, your reply will be that, So and So said this and that, pre-war, and was ignored. The reply to that is: out of 20 million opinions, how is anybody supposed to know exactly WHO to listen to?  Obviously, you can't. So you listen to the advice of people that you trust, and try to be flexible enough to adjust to the real situation, when it occurs.

 Bottom line - Were mistakes made? You betcha. Mistakes are always made. And mistakes will be made in reacting to the first mistakes. That's life. And that's every huge undertaking (war or not) in the history of Man. My problem with every critic of the Iraq War is this: So what? There are no 'do-overs' in life, or war. If you don't have any helpful suggestions about NOW, be quiet.

redcity8 have you watched the movie "No End In Sight"? Because you say this:  It contains clips of Rumsfelt? Yep. Taken out of context, without HIS explaination of what he meant? Yep, again. 
I'm under the impression you haven't watched the movie, yet you are telling all of us that the movie takes Rumsfield out of context and doesn't let him explain what he meant.

The reply to that is: out of 20 million opinions, how is anybody supposed to know exactly WHO to listen to?  Obviously, you can't. So you listen to the advice of people that you trust, and try to be flexible enough to adjust to the real situation, when it occurs.

I guess you might trust the people that were put in charge of Iraq by the Bush Administration.  You might wonder why so many of them feel the need to speak out about what happened.  I personally think what these top level people had to say was very interesting.  You seem to be quick to dismiss any criticism as Monday Morning Quarterbacking, and why can't we just focus on the current issues.

I'm curious as to "out of the 20 million opinions" who it is that you "trust"?

You're right, I have not watched that 'movie'. I don't watch propaganda, no matter what the subject, or source. ( I also don't watch Administration briefings, or speechs) I know that in your original post you mentioned that you don't like propaganda, either. And opined that this movie was better then the usual. I submit that this just better done then normal. After all, anybody who goes to the trouble to create such a movie is obviously motivated on the subject. Which means they have an 'opinion' to support, and everything they include in their movie will support that opinion. And EVERY 'report' or 'documentary' takes things out of context and 'cut and pastes' disparate people and opinions to create an illusion of 'obviousness'. If I'm over-jaded, and am being unfair to THIS particular documentary, forgive me -  but I have read literally THOUSANDS of various opinions etc, and all have been the same: Here's my opinion, and now I will pull out whatever info supports it, and ignore everything else.

"Whose opinion do I trust"  Personally, I trust my opinion. And only my opinion.   Country-wise, I trust the President's opinion. Why? Because his opinion is the only one that counts. Once you reject his leadership, you have no leader. Once you pass on his opinion, you can take your pick of  the opinions of a thousand politicians and pundits, none of whom have enuff  authority to matter. Don't agree with the Prez? Well, you get to vote for a new one every few years, then you can disagree with him, too.  and please put another 'r' in quarterback - "quaterback" is driving me crazy, after three times...