The US invasion did bring down a remarkably unpleasant dictatorship, but at cost of some eight years of turmoil and conflict, some 5,000 US and allied lives and 35,000 wounded, and over 100,000 Iraqi lives. The Congressional Research Service estimates that the dollar cost of the war to the US alone is over $823 billion through FY2012, and SIGIR estimates that the US and its allies will have spent some $75 billion on aid – much of it with little lasting benefit to Iraq. The outcome in Afghanistan and Pakistan now seems unlikely to be any better. While any such judgments are subjective, the odds of meaningful strategic success have dropped from roughly even in 2009 to 4:1 to 6:1 against at the end of 2011. It is all very well for senior US officials to discuss ―fight, talk, and build,‖ and for creating a successful transition before the US and ISAF allies withdraw virtually all of their combat troops and make massive cuts in the flow of outside money to Afghanistan. The US, however, has yet to present a credible and detailed plan for transition that shows the US and its allies can achieve some form of stable, strategic outcome in Afghanistan that even approaches the outcome of the Iraq War." --------------------------------------
"Yet Iraq is already a grand strategic failure. The US went to war for the wrong reasons, let Iraq slide into a half decade of civil war, and failed to build an effective democracy and base for Iraq’s economic development. Its tactical victories – if they last – did little more than put an end to a conflict it help create, and the US failed to establish anything like the strategic partnership it sought.
There is war and then there is dumb war. These have been dumb wars, poorly conceived and poorly executed. pl
https://csis.org/files/publication/111115_Afghanistan_at_End_2011.pdf
Amen Brother!!!
But to point out the obvious tragedy of it all. I figure, Georgie Bush and Darth Vader Cheney,one way or the other walked out of this insanity with a cool billion$$$(CAN YOU AY NO BID CONTRACT!) or so in their and their cronies pockets.
The disloyal bastards ought to be in a federal penitentiary, but I'm a lot more likely to end up there for just saying this.
Posted by: highlander | 16 November 2011 at 07:57 PM
Yes...More Clear Abuses of Political Power that has done nothing good for The United States or our Military Folks...and has added to Our 14 TRILLION $$$$ Dollar Debt..We will see in 12 Months how much good any of this did in Iraq...and how much the Region has changed by then..
It was "Poorpy" Execution indeed..
Posted by: Jim Ticehurst | 16 November 2011 at 08:22 PM
I am very favourably impressed with Cordesman's write-up. Frankly, I had not expected him to come up with such a clear-eyed analysis and conclusions.
As usual, I fully agree with Col Lang's succinct assessment.
Posted by: FB Ali | 16 November 2011 at 08:29 PM
Colonel I like your summary better than everything Cordesman wrote. The assumption he presents that we could ever have "built an effective democracy and base for economic development," whether in Iraq or Afghanistan, sets my teeth on edge.
We failed at that thing we had no control of anyway, huh Tony? Well, dang.
Posted by: Mike C | 16 November 2011 at 08:31 PM
"...the US failed to establish anything like the strategic partnership it sought." Who in their right mind thinks a country gains a strategic partnership by invading a their 'partner'? Chalabi and company must still be laughing their asses off at the neocons.
Posted by: Fred | 16 November 2011 at 08:58 PM
I think that $billion was Eric Prince of Blackwater. (He's related to the Devos family); I think Bush probably had little or no financial gain out of the whole mess.
Posted by: Fred | 16 November 2011 at 09:00 PM
It has taken Cordesman this long to figure out what I had already figured out at the time...that this wasn't the brightest idea in the world?
It makes me proud to have gotten "flipped off" at anti-war rallies in 2002 & 2003! I still have the posters, just in case.
Posted by: Jackie | 16 November 2011 at 09:26 PM
Fred,
I ve been at the table in your imperial capital, when the door opened, and in walked an "Odd Job" like joker with two grocery bags full of $100.00 bills as a gift to one of our elected public servants.....At the end of the day, it's always about the money,son!
Particularly, for a stupid SOB like Bush. Do a little research on the Bush family business interests.
Posted by: highlander | 16 November 2011 at 09:50 PM
Well, look at what these wars have accomplished: a wrecked foreign policy, a national government trillions of dollars in the hole, and a wave of ginned up political support for cutting Medicare, Social Security and basically any public spending, and a public that is too numbed and dumbed to remember our history and protect our legacy, the Constitution.
I won't say it was a conspiracy, but I do think a lot of support for these wars had nothing to do with national security, and everything to do with personal and political gain. Our good soldiers deserved better than this. We deserved better than this. The a**holes who did this are still running around loud and proud, secretly laughing at us rubes, and planning their next diversion so they can get away with the loot, and the country.
Posted by: Roy G. | 16 November 2011 at 11:22 PM
I understand Mr. Chalabi is now active undermining US in Bahrein?
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 17 November 2011 at 12:06 AM
....now for the privilege of being taken to the cleaners, how much did the neocons pay Chalabi and company?
Posted by: J | 17 November 2011 at 02:21 AM
The US gained strategic partners in Germany and Japan by invading them in the second World War.
Of course, those invasions were part of a total mobilization war which destroyed the target countries' ruling structures, flooding the countries with enough US army draftees to maintain security, followed by the rebuilding of the Marshall Plan. There was no meaningful military resistance to those occupations.
Perhaps part of the failure is that the USA tried to do Iraq on the cheap. The message sold by the Bush team was that, once Saddam was removed, the Iraqi people would be revealed as Jeffersonian yeoman farmers who loved Israel. Remember, the war wasn't going to cost more than $50 billion: the guy who forecast a cost of over $100 billion was fired.
In addition, one political lesson the establishment learned from Vietnam is that nothing drives an anti-war movement like a military draft. So a draft, to generate enough troops to secure Iraq while fighting continued in Afghanistan, had to be avoided at all costs, even the cost of insane, repeated deployments of reservists. (I'm meandering, but I do believe the US broke faith with the National Guard and Reserves in the Iraq & Afghan war, by effectively conscripting many of them for repeated combat tours while refusing to crank up the draft.)
Posted by: Chairman Miao | 17 November 2011 at 08:39 AM
"I understand Mr. Chalabi is now active undermining US in Bahrein?"--WSC
So true. But cnsidering that we are supporting another unelected king, who cares?
Posted by: Matthew | 17 November 2011 at 09:31 AM
It would be soooo easy for Mr. Chalabi to conveniently slip on a bar of soap in his morning shower. Or he could have an electrical moment when he plays with one of his electrical toys or turns on one of his lights.
Ahhh, life has its moments, and one could be 'brought to' Mr. Chalabi and he'd never know it until it was too late on his part.
Posted by: J | 17 November 2011 at 09:53 AM
highlander,
you personally saw someone hand off a bribe to an elected official? That needs to go to the FBI not me. As to GWB, he made his money by selling his share of the Rangers after pushing through a bill to have the taxpayers pay for building the baseball field in Arlington.
Posted by: Fred | 17 November 2011 at 12:27 PM
J.
4000+ US dead and counting.
Posted by: Fred | 17 November 2011 at 12:28 PM
Chairman Miao,
The Empire of Japan attacked the United States, not the other way around. Nazi Germany declared war upon the US on December 11th, 1941.
I'm aware of the hogwash used to sell the 'they'll great us as liberators' war. your comments on the Guard and Reserves should be directed solely to the Bush Administration, they were perfectly legal. He, unlike Roosevelt, chose the legalistic route to avoid the political fall-out. Just like the bank bailout enacted after the election but before the inauguration of Obama.
Posted by: Fred | 17 November 2011 at 12:36 PM
The posts here are clear. These wars are the ultimate corruption. A Trillion Dollars spent for no gain; young men and women dying for no good reason. The tragedy is that “It don’t mean nothing” is again is the appropriate enlistee attitude.
From Kabul through Brussels and Wall Street onto Washington DC; decisions are made on the basis of enriching oneself and screwing everyone else.
Posted by: VietnamVet | 17 November 2011 at 12:53 PM
Instead of thinking about whether or not the US invasion of Iraq benefited the US, ask if it achieved any goals of those who launched the war.
First, it is my impression that Western Oil has indeed obtained a lock on Iraqi oil reserves.
Second, Iraq was neatly knocked out of the anti-Israeli faction in the Mideast.
Third, the Military-Industrial Complex enriched itself.
Fourth, the U.S. got a huge chain of new military bases bordering Iran and I have not heard a sound about any plans to vacate those bases.
Posted by: William deB. Mills | 17 November 2011 at 01:17 PM
And during the whole war, who was asking about the fraud being practiced by Big Finance or the millions in personal profit gained by the CEO's of the companies with military contracts? The war in Iraq was won...by them.
Posted by: William deB. Mills | 17 November 2011 at 01:21 PM
Like I said, it's always about the money at the end of the day. Doesn't matter whether it's making war or playing baseball.
Posted by: highlander | 17 November 2011 at 01:56 PM
Cecil B.
"Western Oil has indeed obtained a lock on Iraqi oil reserves" What is the basis for that assertion? pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 17 November 2011 at 02:12 PM
The lock on Iraqi oil has already been picked by the Chinese.
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 17 November 2011 at 03:08 PM
"These have been dumb wars, poorly conceived and poorpy [sic] executed."
I suspect that the vast majority of Americans understand this, and may even talk about it openly in small groups. My office has active duty folks, lots of vets, and a few civies who never served. There are no heated discussions, and nobody comes to the defense when I let my opinion be known that Iraq was just plain stupid.
But our wonderful elite don't say a word. It's like Iraq never happened.
Posted by: Cold War Zoomie | 17 November 2011 at 07:16 PM
Chairman Miao! Although PL disagrees IMO we totally disarmed the Germans and Japanese after defeating them. Rearmed both after 1949. In Iraq and Afghanistan we continue to arm our oppositions due to weak controls on arms transfers and theft due to poor security.
But hey after Iraq seizes Kuwait the second time we may again want them as an ally for some reason. My guess is seizing Kuwait will be the first up for Iraqi force projection planning.
With NO Maggie Thatcher USA will not complain this time around about demise of corrupt kingdom. And perhaps the same goes for Kuwait?
By the way PL how many corrupt kingdoms propped up by US in MENA now post ARAB SPRING as I forget.
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 18 November 2011 at 10:11 AM