Disbanding the iraqi military
Not anticipating the hatred and revenge attacks Sunni's and Shia's would perpetrate on each other
Not having enough troops to secure major cities from sectarian violence.
Not getting water, electricity, etc. up and running fast enough.
Not taking out Muqtadah Al Sadr when he had the chance.
Not training Iraqi security forces fast enough.
The whole thing has been a cluster-you-know-what, and I was one who was in FAVOR of going in!
2007-02-26 15:24:20
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Not allowing anyone here to say that going in was "the" most major mistake he made?
Doing that is like saying, (hypothetical) I know that (blank) sank the Titanic and killed all of those people, but what mistakes has he made? Not sinking it but filling the life boats?
Anyone who has even an average IQ had to know that Iraq was another Vietnam. Only without the trees.
The majority of the people do not want us there. NO......let me rephrase that..... The VAST majority of the people do not want us there. We went in, knowing that the Shiites were going to be supported by Iran, ( If anyone in our present administration has the capacity to think) we got daddy's big bully out. He's dead. Now daddy is safe.
The biggest mistake that Bush made was not giving our troops the order to shoot Saddam on sight when he was found. All this hanging around and getting our troops killed while they held a "trial" is stupid. They got the "threat" now lets pull the troops out and let these people solve their own problems. Of course now it will be worse since we have given more power to the Iranians, but what the heck...... it's only human lives right?
2007-02-26 15:38:53
·
answer #2
·
answered by Marilyn 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think the mistake he made was perhaps listening to some advisors who are too idealistic...really think they can just make a democracy like we have in the USA happen .....they believe everyone should have it, and so with the best of intentions they try to help the Iraqi people have what we have.
The problem with this idealistic view is it took sweat, blood and tears ...we had to be willing to fight to the death for the freedom we have today....and they would have to do the same...but they are not a united country....and I think these well meaning advisors had no idea how hard it would be....not to mention that they have a group of people there who don't want democracy at all and will fight to defeat it. It is the Iraqi people themselves that would have to make it happen....in the end, we can't do it for them.
This does not mean that we should not support our troops and our President. I think he is honestly trying to do what is best for our country....if we let the other side win....we will rue the day!
So I think the answer is some people thought it would be easier than it is...and Bush listened to them.
But I'll stand any day for a President who doesn't operate based on the daily polls....who does what he believes is right for all of us....and who stands his ground...doesn't budge an inch. I am proud of voting for him. Who wants a mealy-mouthed wimpy President? I don't!
2007-02-26 15:32:53
·
answer #3
·
answered by samantha 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Paying al queda mercenaries that bombed the world trade center?
Hersh: U.S. Funds Being Secretly Funneled To Violent Al Qaeda-Linked Groups
New Yorker columnist Sy Hersh says the “single most explosive” element of his latest article involves an effort by the Bush administration to stem the growth of Shiite influence in the Middle East (specifically the Iranian government and Hezbollah in Lebanon) by funding violent Sunni groups.
Hersh says the U.S. has been “pumping money, a great deal of money, without congressional authority, without any congressional oversight” for covert operations in the Middle East where it wants to “stop the Shiite spread or the Shiite influence.” Hersh says these funds have ended up in the hands of “three Sunni jihadist groups” who are “connected to al Qaeda” but “want to take on Hezbollah.”
Hersh summed up his scoop in stark terms: “We are simply in a situation where this president is really taking his notion of executive privilege to the absolute limit here, running covert operations, using money that was not authorized by Congress, supporting groups indirectly that are involved with the same people that did 9/11.” Watch it:
2007-02-26 15:27:43
·
answer #4
·
answered by HawkEye 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Believing Cheney and Rumie when they said that the Iraqis were going to greet us in the streets with flowers and open arms. Also believing the same people that the Iraq war would "pay for itself" due to incresed oil production.
If these weren't so sad, they would almost be funny.
2007-02-26 15:25:21
·
answer #5
·
answered by TJTB 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
a million. They invaded depending upon pretend intelligence!!! 2. They thoroughly left out Osama Bin weighted down and Afghanistan. 3. they actually allowed the Bin weighted down kin to fly out on airplanes at the same time as some thing of u.s. became grounded. 4. Even once they ADMITED they knew their intelligence became defective they remained in Iraq. 5. in the journey that they were going to invade a united states of america for NO reason in any respect the LEAST they'd have performed became stole their oil and given it to the american human beings, yet hey, you comprehend with trees BLIND OIL stocks AND ALL, that ought to have decrease into his earnings margins.
2016-12-05 00:20:34
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Lying to the American People about WMD's being in Iraq which did not exist, Lied about Al Quida having a link to Bin Laden
Never got Osama Bin Laden.
The first decision made to attack Osama Bin Laden in some bunker was made from bad intelligence, meant not only did we not get him, but now there was no element of surprise anymore.
Insisted more troops were not necessary, now says they are.
Stopped listening to congress, the American people, generals, members of his own party, sent our troops in without proper gear, and lost 80% of weapons sent and put them instead in hands of the enemy, He has fired all federal prosecutors and re-appointed whom ever he wanted. Ask
yourself why? Maybe he is going to be convicted of crimes against America soon
and he knows it.
Much better if there on your side.
He has spent billions of dollars bribing our reporters and buying their
silence.
Making "no reporting zones" in America.
Passing the Patriot act. This in and of itself is a slaughter of our bill of
rights as it takes out 5 all in one fatal sweep. Habeus Corpus, gone! Convict citizens with evidence not made avail to defense
No free speech.
They did not anticipate sectarian violence
A better question would be what has he done right since he got there?
2007-02-26 16:52:56
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
I don't know what you're supposed to expect in the average invasion of a sovereign country but letting the carpetbaggers in to exploit the place is probably the biggest mistake - well unless you're a complete capitalist pig. That's second only to letting so many die for oil.
2007-02-26 15:34:33
·
answer #8
·
answered by MissWong 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
If we put aside that going to war in the first place was really a enormous mistake, I think that one of his big mistakes was not having a plan on how to leave that country stable in a very short time.
2007-02-26 15:23:43
·
answer #9
·
answered by fun 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
well going after the wrong person could be the first clue.
Hassen DID NOT order the plans into the towers.
He Insulted Bushes Daddy,
Bin Laden is still FREE and NO one seems to give a DAMN.
2007-02-26 15:25:24
·
answer #10
·
answered by spiritwalker 6
·
2⤊
0⤋