Ahmad Chalabi, who had been anointed by the United States before the invasion to lead postwar Iraq, is now without a job — though not short of money — and spurned by his former Pentagon and Capitol Hill buddies, including Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan. Not surprisingly, Chalabi blames U.S. officials, especially former Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, for the failures in Iraq.
“The Pentagon guys chickened out,” Chalabi said in a long profile in this week’s New York Times Magazine. He argues that America needed to immediately step out of the way after the invasion and let the Iraqis take charge. He contends that a new Iraqi government could have acted quickly and harshly to regain control of the country.
‚”There would have been no insurgency,” he said. “We would have had electricity. The Americans screwed it up.”
Though America did botched the transition, Chalabi’s hindsight is filled with holes, as was the prewar intelligence that he peddled. As the Times piece noted:
‚”Chalabi is essentially arguing that a handful of Iraqi exiles, some of whom had not lived in the country in decades, could have put together a government and quelled the chaos that quickly engulfed the country after Hussein’s regime collapsed. They could have done this, presumably, without an army (which most wanted to dissolve) and without a police force (which was riddled with Baathists).”
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Monkeyhawk on Let immigrants run
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- okobserver on Let immigrants run
- littlejohn on Open thread 11/23
- donndublin on Open thread 11/23
- okobserver on Let immigrants run
- okobserver on Let immigrants run
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/23
- writerdog on Open thread 11/23
13 Comments
Even a liar can tell the truth at times.
Chalabi is essentially correct.
You can have control or you can have democracy in Iraq–you can’t have both.
Bush has opted for control with the facade of democracy and self-determination.
The Iraqis, who built their infrastructure pre-invasion, have been cut out of the re-building process, with half a billion a week going to no-bid contractors who just happen to all be Bush cronies.
These people are doing nothing but cashing the gov’t checks.
Now that the adults are in charge, we may be able to turn this around . . .
They would have quickly killed the Sunnies, or driven them all out. But I kind of doubt if the other Sunni countries would have stood by.
what adults? The new congress? GW is still the man for 2 more. Deal with it sympathizers. Chalabi is as corrupt as they come. It’s just sour grapes because he got cut out. War is a money maker, it always has been and it always will be. Take lady bird for example, how many helicopters did Bell sell during vietnam? Now its just another group of rich businessmen making money in Iraq. Should the contracts go to the French, the Russians, the Iraqis or Americans? I would rather see the American business’ getting the dough. Politician are politicians period. They may say they are dems or repubs but they are in it for themselves. The real question should be Do you want the US to win in Iraq?
GW has been neutered, he won’t be screwing up much more, deal with it.
Ahmad Chalabi is really pissed, poor fellow. How dare Halliburton, Brown & Root, etc., STEAL the money that he was going to STEAL ? Just the nerve of those bastards is enough to make your camel puke. Even his goat has cut him off, and he can’t get laid anymore. Well, Ahmad, you know what we say here in America … “Somedays you’re the windshield, some days you’re the bug!”
Call your buddy Brownback … surely, he’ll still take your calls. Nobody else wants to talk to him.
Right on, rm; right on.
A Staggering New Bill For Iraq?Jessica Holzer and Matthew Swibel 11.09.06, 6:00 AM ETThe U.S. armed services have requested a $160 billion supplemental appropriation to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in the remainder of fiscal year 2007–a staggering amount that, if approved by the Defense Department, may hasten the showdown between resurgent congressional Democrats and the Bush administration over the budget-busting War on Terror.
The request–which will likely include all costs related to the war on terrorism–far surpasses the $94 billion supplemental authorized earlier this year to fund the ongoing wars as well as hurricane recovery in the Gulf and is nearly double the $82 billion Iraq war supplemental outlay of 2005. It comes within days of Republicans’ stunning losses in the midterm elections and the resignation of embattled Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who was set to decide on the request Nov. 15.
While House Speaker-to-be Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has vowed not to undercut the troops in the field, defense experts said that she and other Democratic leaders probably hadn’t anticipated the massive request.
“I’m not sure they’ve grasped the potential size of this forthcoming supplemental request. We’ll just have to see whether they can choke down that amount of dough,” said Tom Donnelly, a defense expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.
While a good chunk of the $160 billion request will be used to replace worn equipment, it also covers additional systems, armor and weaponry and thus is a blueprint for pressing on with the current troop levels in Iraq and strategy in the War on Terror.
“It’s not just going to be ‘I broke my tank, and I want to fix it,’” Donnelly said.
Small-cap defense contractors, such as DRS Technologies (nyse: DRS – news – people ), Essex (nasdaq: KEYW – news – people ) and Armor Holdings (nyse: AH – news – people ), are particularly sensitive to defense supplementals because they don’t hold as much sway over the regular defense appropriations process. However, they are not likely to be counting on a defense supplemental of such size.
Critics contend that the Bush administration has skirted the normal budget process for these defense expenditures to avoid scrutiny of the costs of the ongoing wars. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., has sponsored legislation to fold these war costs into regular defense spending bills.
Such emergency supplementals are often used for spending that doesn’t past muster in the light of the normal budget process: For example, more than $7.5 billion in spending slashed from the 2005 defense appropriations bill was restored in the next supplemental, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense.
“Chalabi is as corrupt as they come”
That is why he fit in so well with Bush, PNAC, AIPAC and CUFI.
Humpty dumpty sat on a wall,Humpty dumpty took a great fall,Now all the King’s horses and all the King’s men,Can’t put Humpty Dumpty back together again.
Boy, that’s been a lot of years!
Chalabi was sitting on the wall ready to become the World’s richest or poorest man. Looks like he fell to the poor side and won’t be put back together again!
Chalabi and his fellow Iraqi expatriates were largely responsible for the cherry-picked “intel” that got us into the Iraqi War. Bush and the Neocons used their “documentation” to build their case for war.
Chalabi and Co. should be tried for war crimes and executed along with Saddam.
I am not a proponent of the death penalty, but Chalabi is responsible for 2,849 American deaths – and that deserves severe punishment.
Not to mention 2/3 million Iraqi deaths. Hell, Chalabi might even be worse than that other US ally – Saddam.
Sounds like mass graves isn’t just a Saddam trademark anymore. Bush’s post election poll puts him at 31%, I think that’s about the same number that would follow him to hell.
you are probably right about that. I can not believe people still support exposed frauds