Skip to main content

No End In Sight

I watched an absolutely horrifying documentary on-demand on Netflix called No End In Sight. I highly recommend it. It covers the Iraq war, primarily the aftermath of the war - in particular focusing on the lack of planning, poor decision making, and arrogance of the Bush administration. The beginning parts of the movie make clear the lack of post-war planning that was in place when the war started and even when the war ended. There were literally no plans. That part of the movie is obviously disturbing. But the majority of the movie is actually focused in on three policies put into place by Paul Bremer under the Coalition Provisional Authority. Those were:
  1. Not declaring martial law and not providing enough troops to maintain order
  2. De-Ba'athification
  3. Disbanding the Iraqi Army

The repurcussions of the first one are pretty obvious. There's no police, there's no army, and Saddam Hussein released thousands of criminals before the war started. What do you expect to happen? Looting, violonce, vandalism, etc. And then with the second and third, I suppose if you're a political hardliner, some of these decisions may have made sense. For instance, the Ba'athist were the political party in power under Saddam Hussein. How could you possibly trust any of them in the new administration? Aren't they all totally corrupt? I suppose you could say the same thing about the Iraqi Army. How could you trust them? Why not just completely disenfrancise them? Maybe that will work. Well, that's what they did. The problem with the "De-Ba'athification" was that the only people in the country that were trained to run a government were immediately told that they could never work for the government ever again. These are all the intellectuals and even the school teachers. How do you run a government without these people - most of which were apolitical and had only joined the Ba'ath party to continue their careers? The problem with disenfranchising hundreds of thousands of Iraqi soldiers (like 500,000) was two-fold. The first is that there was suddenly no military - i.e. no one to protect Iraq's border, to protect it's infrastructure, to maintain peace and order. The second is that suddenly you have half a million out of work men who have no way of feeding their families. What do they do? The only job in town is to join the insurgency, so why not do that?

Overall, just a frightening frightening summary of post-war Iraq. But what's most disturbing is the amazing arrogance of the Bush administration and how they didn't listen to any of the advice provided to them by the military or intelligence communities. Equally sad as it is infuriating.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Nine Prescriptions for Building the Duke Entrepreneurial Community

I think Duke can have one of the strongest entrepreneurial communities in the world. Are we there yet? Well, not yet. But there's a tremendous amount of momentum that I saw build in just the past two years while I was getting my MBA at Duke. While leading Duke's 10th annual business plan competition, the Duke Start-Up Challenge (DSC) , last year, I witnessed a near doubling of participation on campus in just a single year. The interest on the ground was clearly there and building rapidly. But now that I'm an alum, I'm looking back and wondering ... how do we rev-up the Duke entrepreneurial community even more? I read a great article by Daniel Isenberg, a professor of management at Babson, called " How to Start an Entrepreneurial Revolution " in the June edition of the Harvard Business Review. Isenberg outlines nine prescriptions for governments that want to create entrepreneurship ecosystems in their countries. Although he was focused on governments an...
3 comments
Read more

Dancing on the Edge of a Volcano

I found this opinion piece ( Democrats aren't innocent bystanders ) interesting on how both Democrats and Republicans share responsibility for polarizing the electorate and undermining some of its faith in democracy. It references two other posts that were pretty good as well: The Disease of Delegitimization The Weimarization of the American Republic The second article is really long and heavy on history.  But given all of the comparisons people make between the current times and those of post-WWI Germany, I found it interesting to dive in to understand where the comparisons are coming from and how close we really are.  The short answer is that we aren't that close (phew). Seems like post-WWI Germany was incredibly fragile.  This was a good excerpt that summarized it: So, unlike the 60s, you have a dynamic in which both sides are behaving like radicals, in which the establishment isn’t yelling “stop,” and in which oikophobia is more evenly distributed, relative to its Boo...
Post a Comment
Read more

A Possible Solution to the Mortgage Crisis

Came across this one on Mankiw's blog as well (... someone has been stealing my WSJ's each morning before I can pick them up outside). Martin Feldstein, a professor at Harvard and chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors for Reagan, had an opinion article in the WSJ yesterday that outlined a possible solution to the mortgage crisis. Criteria for the plan is: don't shift burden to taxpayers, don't force banks to eat all the losses, and create an incentive for homeowners to stay in their homes. The idea is that the US government would provide loans to homeowners up to 20% of their mortgage amount, with a 15 year pay-back period and adjustable interest rate based on the two-year treasury note. The whole thing would be funded by selling more two-year treasury notes. This would obviously not stop anyone from walking away from their home if they have negative equity, but it might prompt those that are worried about that scenario happening to them in the future to sti...
Post a Comment
Read more