« Country People & Airports (Umra Inconveniences) | Psychology, Investing and Pressing Flesh »

September 17, 2006

The CPA Iraq, A Reconfirmation

It would hardly seem news, but this Washington Post article on how the Americans staffed the occupation of Iraq is nevertheless interesting; I of course know - even fairly well - many of the persons alluded to (I met that "24 year old" political twit, for example). The article is spot on as far as I experienced the deluded fools on the ground, the news I suppose is the American side process that led to the fiasco.

It is for these reasons I began calling the "convservatives" in the US "Right Bolsheviks" - the approach, the mentality is Bolshevik, not old school practical of the democratic western right.

Posted by The Lounsbury at September 17, 2006 08:45 AM
Filed Under: Iraq

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:


wow. Political screening, blind ideological adherence, unattainable goals with non-existing means. This one sums it up:

Tabatabai, who held a doctorate in political science from Florida State University, believed Hallen's plan was unrealistic. "It was something so fancy, so great, that it couldn't be accomplished," he said. [...] "Those CPA people reminded me of Lawrence of Arabia."

Reading the article, it really does come off as a pitiful attempt at colonizing an alien country.

This is pure gold: (Haveman) urged the Health Ministry to mount an anti-smoking campaign.

No wonder they want the Americans out.

It's a thought that has been rummaging around in my head: The ideology of the Bush admin is total, like Communism, and so no mistakes, faults or general malcontent must be admitted, because that would break the ideological bubble. Just like the Communist states would never, ever admit that maybe, just maybe, people weren't superhappy always and ever under Communism.

Posted by: Klaus [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 17, 2006 02:26 PM

Interestingly, almost exactly the same article showed up in FP's "5 years on" edition. Same twit examples and everything.

I wanted to write a longer piece about Bremer Iraq, but the whole thing is so stale.

Posted by: eerie [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 17, 2006 05:01 PM

Amazing. I suppose it's not surprising, given that the Republican party's only real ideology is to put "their guy" in charge, through whatever means, and then everything will be perfect. But to throw common sense so utterly to the wind in such a setting, even for ultra-politicized opportunists... but of course they never had any to begin with.

Posted by: zurn at September 17, 2006 06:20 PM

Wow. How do these people get around? They could have sent teenagers on acid that the results would likely have been better.

Posted by: Frandroid Atreides at September 17, 2006 06:48 PM

First, Zurn, you're painting with the wrong brush.

I know many, many Republican party Americans who have a coherent world view that is Right and pragmatic.

Writing as you do Republican party's only real ideology is to put "their guy" is vulgar idiocy. IDOICY as contemptible as the Anti Globo whinging on, etc. or the moronic ideologues who label anything Left of them "commie."

Klaus rather puts it more intelligently, and echoes in a clearer manner than myself, my very reason for labelling these people Right Bolsheviks: The ideology of the Bush admin is total, like Communism, and so no mistakes, faults or general malcontent must be admitted...

In case anyone doesn't know, I lived in Eastern Europe under Soviet occupation. My usage of Right Bolshevik isn't idiotic knee jerking, as a young boy I saw the real deal.

(Although I always did find secret police somewhat charming the way they followed me around, as if I was important, which I was not)

Posted by: The Lounsbury at September 17, 2006 09:40 PM

Among the many reasons I opposed the intervention in Iraq was the sense that Good Lord, these people have LESS THAN a clue about the Mideast and/or Iraq, to imagine them trying to govern it, . . . .

While the Lefties were drivelling on about wars for oil and all that crap, the fact is that it was partly a "war for rewarding supporters", intentional or not, and that is the tendency of governments, whether in discretionary war-waging or "nice" protective government overreach efforts as in welfare, protectionism, socialized medicine etc.

Posted by: matthew hogan at September 17, 2006 10:07 PM

that reminds of what someone said (can't for the life of me remember who) about Hamas: What is dangerous is not that they are fanatics, but they are complete amateurs.

Posted by: Klaus [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 17, 2006 10:18 PM

Let me try that again: What is dangerous is not that they are fanatics, but that they are complete amateurs.

Posted by: Klaus [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 17, 2006 11:02 PM

At this point, until proven otherwise, I think it's fair to equate "republican", or at least "the republican power structure" with "right bolshy".

Posted by: Tom Scudder at September 18, 2006 12:08 AM

hm, I think that would be unfair to the Republicans that lament the evangelical takeover of GOP. The evangelical neo-con (for want of a better word) movement not only sidelined Dems, but also the classical Republicans. But they certainly have been quiet and acquiescent the past few years.

Posted by: Klaus [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 18, 2006 12:41 AM

K: "quiet and acquiescent" are the words. If they want, ever, to be taken seriously (by the all-important "me" demographic), they'll have to do some seriously public purging of antisocial elements.

Posted by: Tom Scudder at September 18, 2006 12:54 AM

Eh. Internal Republican bickering is, um, uninteresting, to say the least. Best line I ever heard in this regard, and I have no idea where I heard this, is that if your progeny shows signs of becoming one, leave the spoiled little bastid out in the rain for a few hours in a bad storm, and ignore his/hers cries for help.
That'll learn 'em.
As for Iraq, I just stumbled across an excellent little book, "Babylon By Bus", written by these two slackers who backpacked their way into Iraq and wound up employed by the CPA. I haven't finished it yet, but it's pretty decent, so far.

Posted by: pantom at September 18, 2006 01:04 AM

And the banner's still not working as a link back to the main page.
Mutter, mutter, mutter...

Posted by: pantom at September 18, 2006 01:07 AM

Quiet you!

eerie and Lounsbury still haven't got the new templates. Will migrate them soon.

Posted by: eerie [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 18, 2006 02:16 AM

I had a very pragmatic, rationalist professor who was acquainted with pretty much everyone on the Washington side of things, and upon the news of Bremer's appointment said "and the Iraqis thought the worst we could do to them was bomb them." apparently Bremer used to wear this gold fetus pin all the time, disturbing AND tacky

Posted by: johna at September 18, 2006 07:33 AM

A UK trade publication, Acountancy Age, ran many articles describing the mishandling of Iraq funds by the CPA. I listed them on a blog about a year ago. It offers a decent timeline. A quick javascript check of the links just now indicate that those links are still live, but some of the ones from other pubs posted later, are not.

Posted by: SueDoeCyAnts at September 19, 2006 06:04 PM

so, regarding GOP, now people like John Cole are going to vote Democratic, because of the torture endorsement by McCain and Bush. Wonder how this will change USA in the long run, both GOP torture and GOP split. Maybe these real conservatives will inspire others like them to not be so quiet and acquiescent anymore.

300 votes in Florida.

Posted by: Klaus [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 24, 2006 07:32 PM

L: Given the rampant cronyism in the admin, I hardly see how my slight generalism warrants such an enthousiastic response from you. Hardly unexpected though. Yes, I do realize not all Republicans are this way. It only takes a few. In any case, I don't feel that strongly about it. Are you a Republican?

The other half of my family grew up under Communist oppression; I know what it's about.

Posted by: zurn at October 9, 2006 03:10 PM

I dislike simple minded party political generalisations. Whether it is Left or Right.

Posted by: The Lounsbury at October 10, 2006 09:59 AM

Comment Subscription

Email Address: