Gates: ‘I don’t know’ whether Iraq war was a ‘good idea.’
Gates: ‘I don’t know’ whether Iraq war was a ‘good idea.’
In an interview with New York Times columnist David Brooks published today, Defense Secretary Robert Gates was hesitant to endorse several cornerstones of President Bush’s foreign policy:
“I don’t think you invade Iraq to bring liberty. You do it to eliminate an unstable regime and because sanctions are breaking down and you get liberty as a byproduct,” he continued.
I asked him whether invading Iraq was a good idea, knowing what we know now. He looked at me for a bit and said, “I don’t know.” [...]
I asked if the military could perform this sort of nation-building, as it is in Iraq. “That’s very short-term stuff. Hooking up water mains. That’s not job creation or institution-building.”
I asked if it was a mistake to put the Pentagon in charge of postwar reconstruction in Iraq instead of the State Department. He thought for a long time but didn’t say anything.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Gates will be taken out to the woodshed for some remedial training in GOP talking points by Cheney’s enforcers.
September 19th, 2007 at 4:16 pm‘I don’t know’ whether Iraq war was a ‘good idea.’
Let me help you out on that one, Gates.
NO, IT WASN’T.
September 19th, 2007 at 4:18 pmAnd how much time will be spent on this admission by the MSM?
September 19th, 2007 at 4:18 pm“I don’t think you invade Iraq to bring liberty. You do it to eliminate an unstable regime and because sanctions are breaking down and you get liberty as a byproduct..”
September 19th, 2007 at 4:20 pm– - Oh, ok. So by that logic, we’re gonna invade Pakistan, North Korea, Syria, Iran, etc…..
Petraeus: I don’t know.
Gates: I don’t know.
That ought to be good for troop morale.
September 19th, 2007 at 4:22 pmgates then went on to say “oops, oh well, i guess whats done is done”
September 19th, 2007 at 4:22 pmUh, Secretary Gates, Vice President Cheney on the phone, and he sounds pissed…!
September 19th, 2007 at 4:22 pm“You do it to eliminate an unstable regime and because sanctions are breaking down and you get liberty as a byproduct”
Nah — you get an even MORE unstable regime as a byproduct.
September 19th, 2007 at 4:22 pmLiberty is a byproduct? A byproduct of what? Certainly not with continual missmanagement, not using Iraqis as the principal work force to rebuild. Not with allowing a shadow army to skirt the Geneva Convention’s regulations in how to conduct themselves.
The byproduct of what we’ve created is resentment.
September 19th, 2007 at 4:24 pmDoes he think it was a mistake to have the Defense Department rather than the State Department in charge of reconstruction . ? . ? . hmmmm, for some 2 decades his party had screamed about how the military was not to be used for nation building and then the Donald and Darth decide to do what . . . build a nation, with the military. Yeah, I’d say that was probably their biggest fuck up, but I could be wrong. There have been so many.
September 19th, 2007 at 4:25 pmThat ought to be good for troop morale.
Comment by Candyce — September 19, 2007 @ 4:22 pm
No, no, no — as everybody knows, what’s bad for troop morale is the Webb amendment. What’s bad for troop morale is troop withdrawal. What’s bad for troop morale are leftist bloggers who want the U.S. outta there. Just ask McCain — or any of the war cheerleaders.
September 19th, 2007 at 4:26 pmsarc/off
Does Bush know freedom was merely a byproduct? I thought that was one of the goals of the invasion? In fact, isn’t it called Operation Iraqi Freedom?
September 19th, 2007 at 4:27 pm“You do it to eliminate an unstable regime and because sanctions are breaking down and you get liberty as a byproductâ€
Nah — you get an even MORE unstable regime as a byproduct.
Comment by missmolly — September 19, 2007 @ 4:22 pm
Indeed. Chaos. Liberty is the one thing the Iraqis have not gotten, as a byproduct or otherwise. Not to mention, what’s this “unstable regime” jive? If it was unstable, why did it take a war to end it?
September 19th, 2007 at 4:31 pmHi, Dave? Bill, here. You know that thing I said about “I don’t know?”
What I meant to say was “I don’t know how you could ask such a stupid question. Of course invading Iraq was a great idea. Oh, and we did it for liberty and we got disarmament as a byproduct (or would have) — no, wait, I didn’t mean that. The Syrians got the WMD. Yeah, yeah. The Syrians. And the Iranians. But we’re not going to bomb them. No, no, I mean we are. No, I mean we might. Uhhhh. Wait a second. Oh! Oh! Okay, Ma. Yeah, I’m hanging up now, Ma! Okay! Hey, uhhh, I have to go. Okay. Yeah, uh, forget I called. Just put down, “No comment.” Okay, bye.
September 19th, 2007 at 4:34 pmGates’ is just the latest eulogy for the Bush Doctrine. For more on the demise of a bad idea whose time never came, see:
September 19th, 2007 at 4:37 pm“The Death of the Bush Doctrine.”
Operation Iraqi Byproduct 4evah! woo!
September 19th, 2007 at 4:42 pmWell…lets just ask the families of dead Iraqis.
September 19th, 2007 at 4:43 pmJuan, better yet, ask the dead Iraqis, and if they don’t respond, count that as a NO.
September 19th, 2007 at 4:57 pmAre you refering to the dead Iraqis with bullet holes in the front of the head or back?
September 19th, 2007 at 5:14 pmHe will be summoned to Cheney’s undisclosed location for additional “education.”
September 19th, 2007 at 5:40 pmIt’s pretty scary though to realize that the SecDef is unsure of the mission in Iraq.
Petraeus said he doesn’t know if we’re safer — before he was called in on the carpet.
Gates says he isn’t sure the invasion was a good idea — let’s see how many days (no, hours) before he is backtracking.
Gates is still a reptile, but hes the closest thing this administration will get to “honest”…..either that or he simply knows well enough that anyone who keeps making rosy statements at this point just looks more and more foolish to those of us with a fully functional frontal cortex…
September 19th, 2007 at 6:21 pmIt’s hard to work for this administration when you’re not a natural-born liar. Gates needs to watch more tape of the Gonzalez hearings to see how it’s done.
September 19th, 2007 at 6:38 pmTimothy, speaking of Gonzo — did everyone see Jon Stewart mock Gonzo’s comment about having some great memories as AtttGen when he claimed he had no recollection of anything more than his name at the hearings.
September 19th, 2007 at 6:41 pmThe “I don’t know President”. Perfect!
September 19th, 2007 at 6:54 pmI didn’t see it, Marie, but to be fair to Fredo, the memories he was talking about were centered on the excellent cookies and punch he’d had just five minutes before.
If you asked him now, he couldn’t tell you whether those cookies were Nutter Butters or Chips Ahoy, but he could assure you that he was not included in the cookie selection process.
September 19th, 2007 at 7:18 pmGates should be summoned to the Hague to state so.
September 19th, 2007 at 7:19 pmYou can’t expect the Secretary to eff the ineffable.
September 19th, 2007 at 8:36 pmI asked if it was a mistake to put the Pentagon in charge of postwar reconstruction in Iraq instead of the State Department.
Major problem with having anybody but the military do reconstruction tasks – Bush tried and failed to get any pro-war conseratives to go overseas and act as on-the-ground administrators. Yes, Jonah Goldberg could have served as a paperwork kinda guy, doing some backroom administrative work, but nobody signed up for that duty. The complete lack of any sort of colonial corps means that the whole neo-con project of resurrecting the age of empires is a complete waste of time, blood, money and resources.
September 20th, 2007 at 12:16 am“I don’t think you invade Iraq to bring liberty. “
And there, in a nutshell, Gates has summarised what the non-Kool Aid drinkers have been saying all along.
Maybe now the Bushbots will begin chanting their usual “that talk undermines the troops’ morale” nonsensical babble.
September 20th, 2007 at 1:34 amI hate to go out on a limb like this, but I’m thinking that it wasn’t a real clever idea going into Iraq.
September 20th, 2007 at 3:51 am