Bremer on the Iraq war

Critics like us are always raging about the virtually innumerable failures of the Bush administration in planning and preparing for the war in Iraq. But every now and then someone whose opinion really counts, like L. Paul Bremer, will come out and give an honest assessment of the war and it's aftermath. The comments he made in two recent speeches have stirred things up a little bit.

"We certainly had enough going into Iraq, because we won the war in a very short three weeks," Mr. Bremer said, according to The Associated Press. But he added: "One way to have stopped the looting would have been to have more troops on the ground. That's a retrospective wisdom of mine, looking backwards. I think there are enough troops there now for the job we are doing."

This is not a major admission of any kind. I think it's safe to say many Americans believe the administration failed to put adequate troops on the ground for the aftermath of the war. The real news is who it's coming from, of course. In an administration that prizes loyalty above honesty, it's news when any member or former member admits to any mistake being made, no matter how common the belief may be that there was, or how minor the mistake itself may be. And of course it gives ammunition to Kerry and administration critics, and makes the charge of the failure to prepare adequately stick just that much more. The response from the administration is also typical.

By the end of the day, Condoleezza Rice, the president's national security adviser, was insisting that Mr. Bush's instructions to his commanders about more troops were "just let me know, you'll have them."

It's the usual tactic. If you can't flat-out lie about the mistake, or impugn the credibility of the person making the charge, just minimize it, or better yet...shift the blame. So now it appears we're supposed to believe that Rumsfeld and Bush had nothing to do with the troop levels after the war; it was the military commanders who failed to ask for enough troops. To be frank, at this point can we believe anything that comes out of Rice's mouth? The ability to say things like this, in addition to other bald lies she's made, with a straight face runs in this administration; she stands right up there with Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Bush himself(although some think he honestly doesn't know better.) And I suppose shifting the blame to the men who actually led and fought the highly succesful invasion is yet another way of supporting the troops.