This story is archived
OpEd: Generals Revolt While Bush Goes Awol »
Posted by: Radiofreeeuropa 2 years, 7 months agoCongress is the only mechanism we have to fill this vacuum in command judgment .. The challenge we face today, is not how to win in Iraq; it is how to recover from a strategic mistake ~ invading Iraq in the first place : former NSA director Gen. William E. Odom (U.S. Army retired) (oped news)
Read Full Story at opednews.com »
Submitted By:
Radiofreeeuropa
All progress comes from unreasonable people.
Rats live on no evil star!
Wasilla: All I saw...
Sorry, just palindroming around with terrorists.
Are you still ...
Who Also Submitted:
This Story is Archived and Commenting is Closed
Comments: 421
-
-
HannibalBarca
May 12, 2007, 3:47 p.m.The last major dictator who did not listen to his Generals lost the war and destroyed his country doing it.
-
getreal1
May 12, 2007, 4:14 p.m.Time to bring home the troops. There is plenty for them to do here. We have to get on our feet and become a healthy nation, from within our nation. The last few decades of a corrupt few running this country to suit their pockets will need to atone to it's people. If there is any nobility in our elected at all that bill shall pass.
-
Amazing1
May 12, 2007, 6:47 p.m.From the article: "But it has served Iran's interest by revenging Saddam Hussein's invasion of Iran in the 1980s and enhancing Iran's influence within Iraq. It has also served al Qaeda's interests, providing a much better training ground than did Afghanistan, allowing it to build its ranks far above the levels and competence that otherwise would have been possible."
"We cannot 'win' a war that serves our enemies interests and not our own. Thus continuing to pursue the illusion of victory in Iraq makes no sense. We can now see that it never did."
There it is. We have been serving Iran and Al Qaeda. Time to leave and start serving the American people who have been providing the blood and money for this insane adventure.
-
NelsonR
May 12, 2007, 7:06 p.m.Every day I see what is reality, yet our government under Bush refuses to accept what is. How can any government survive a Bush type without action. Is this a despotism, dictatorship or minority rule? How can it continue with the apathy that has been shown by the populace.
I am at a point in this abominable war to disavow this government and compare it with Hitler and the Stalin eras. Americans are to blame for electing this idiot and the perpetuation of this corrupt regime in power.
The world court in the Hague must take action against this despotic American government since its citizens refuse to act and the representatives who were elected have criminally acted by malfeasence in office.
-
miklkit
May 12, 2007, 7:49 p.m.The closest comparison to the republicons we have now is the Fascists. The concentration camps are built and ready.
-
lfergie812
May 12, 2007, 8:16 p.m.Good find RFE
This confirms what we have been saying for 10 months that I've been on Netscape. The generals that didn't agree with this administration retired because they couldn't be a party to the mistake in Iraq. Here's another story on the same subject.
-
Reignman
May 12, 2007, 9:11 p.m.Oh brother, the liberal loons are out in full effect again I can see.. I guess none of you bothered to read the International Intelligence Agency Report!!! OH ofcourse you havent...Comparing Republicans to Nazis, just shows the complete ignorance, and blatant stupidity of you... Your rhetoric is beyond repulsive, might I suggest you get gainfully employed, lay off the crack... Which brings me to my next point.. STOP INBREEDING!!!!
-
Sabretooth
May 12, 2007, 9:31 p.m.Ya, that strategy worked well for Hitler, can't see why it will not be just as effective for Bush.
-
-
flyonthewallzz
May 12, 2007, 10:36 p.m.the Yamashita Standard, which holds that a commander who makes no meaningful effort to uncover and stop atrocities is as culpable as if he had ordered them.
-
truthiness
May 13, 2007, 12:09 a.m.you really dont understand why a president should listen to their generals?
military officers go to an academy- a military university- where they study, among other things, strategy. Then, the ones that dont go awol, get to experience that strategy in the field. those who are especially good at strategy and administration, and command decisions become generals.
the president has no such resume. he has many advisors in many areas, all of whom have a better resume than the president on that particular subject. it is the president job to take their advice and then make a decision.
sometimes his decisions will not coincide with their advice, and thats fine, but if they never do, and he keeps being wrong (not to mention killing people)...well now, thats a problem.
-
mcgrievysr
May 13, 2007, 10:40 a.m.LibFighter----Our Generals should be listening to President Bush since he is the Commander and Chief. The idea that Bush listen to his underlings is not correct.
When you post this kind of horsesh it, it's apparent that you're losing the fight with the libs. I'm glad that you're not on my side! Keep up the good work.
-
BravoSierra
May 13, 2007, 11 a.m.LibFighter, please go read my earlier post on the German General Staff Organization and Operations. They had a kill ratio over Americans of 2:1 by the end of the war an in some battles had kill ratios over us of nearly 30:1. YOu are totally ignorant and I'm willing to bet you have never served in the military and most certainly not as an Officer. I'm also willing to bet that you are totally ignornant on the research on the relationship between leadership styles and quality of decision-making and problem solving. In almost all cases, participative and democratic leadership produces superior results to autoccratic leadership. You can start becoming educated instead of ignorant on leadership and problem-solving by reading Paul Hersey and Kenneth Blanchard's work on Management of Organizational Behavior. Their Contingency Leadership Theory is and has been the prevailing theory of leadership for over 30 years.
-
gamahuche
May 13, 2007, 11:38 a.m.According to your logic since he's the CinC then he shouldn't listen to anybody?
What about Laura?
God?
The voices inside his head?
His Dad?
He sure needs some help and support from SOMEBODY.
-
MRCOFFEECAKE
May 13, 2007, 12:44 p.m.Dumbest thing you ever said..>really..So, an alcoholic, cocaine addicted moron who never went to war knows more abour war than
35 year veterans of same??
How do you pick your doctor, by the guy who built the hospital??
You're still enraptured by his pretty smile and dumb look
on his face??
-
flyonthewallzz
May 12, 2007, 9:50 p.m.Gen. Barry McCaffrey
"They're going to try to muscle this thing out in the next 24 months with an urban counterinsurgency plan that I personally believe, with all due respect, is a fool's errand."
-
flyonthewallzz
May 12, 2007, 9:52 p.m.Marine Gen. Joseph Hoar
"This administration's handling of the war has been characterized by deceit, mismanagement and a shocking failure to understand the social and political forces that influence events in the Middle East."
-
flyonthewallzz
May 12, 2007, 9:54 p.m.Anthony Zinni former Commander in Chief of U.S. Central Command
"In the lead-up to the Iraq War and its later conduct, I saw at a minimum, true dereliction, negligence, and irresponsibility, at worse, lying, incompetence and corruption."
-
flyonthewallzz
May 12, 2007, 9:56 p.m.Charles H. Swannack Jr. is a former officer in the United States Army.[1] Swannack's last position within the Army was commander of the Army's 82nd Airborne Division. His last rank was Major General.
" We need to continue to fight the global war on terror and keep it off our shores, But I do not believe Secretary Rumsfeld is the right person to fight that war based on his absolute failures in managing the war against Saddam in Iraq[1]."
-
flyonthewallzz
May 12, 2007, 10 p.m.Lt. Gen. Gregory Newbold of the Marine Corps, who retired in late 2002, has said he regarded the American invasion of Iraq unnecessary. He issued his call for replacing Rumsfeld in an essay in the current edition of Time magazine. General Newbold said
"he regretted not opposing the invasion of Iraq more vigorously, and called the invasion peripheral to the job of defeating Al Qaeda."
-
flyonthewallzz
May 12, 2007, 10:08 p.m.Gen. Merrill "Tony" McPeak
Air Force chief of staff, 1990-94
"The people in control in the Pentagon and the White House live in a fantasy world. They actually thought everyone would just line up and vote for a new democracy and you would have a sort of Denmark with oil. I blame Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and the people behind him -- Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and Undersecretary Douglas Feith."
-
flyonthewallzz
May 12, 2007, 10:11 p.m.Adm. Stansfield Turner
NATO Allied commander for Southern Europe, 1975-77; CIA director, 1977-81
"Whatever you call it, this is now an insurgency using the techniques of terrorism. With the borders poorly guarded, the terrorists come in. All in all, Iraq is a failure of monumental proportions."
-
flyonthewallzz
May 12, 2007, 10:14 p.m.Lt. Gen. Claudia Kennedy
Army deputy chief of staff for intelligence, 1997-2000
"Rumsfeld was profoundly in the dark. I think he really didn't understand what he was doing. He miscalculated the kind of war it was and he miscalculated the interpretation of U.S. behavior by the Iraqi people. They felt they had been invaded. They did not see this as a liberation."
-
flyonthewallzz
May 12, 2007, 10:16 p.m.Gen. Wesley Clark
NATO supreme Allied commander for Europe, 1997-2000
"Troop strength was not the only problem. We got into this mess because the Bush administration decided what they really wanted to do was to invade Iraq, and then the only question was, for what reason? They developed two or three different reasons. It wasn't until the last minute that they came up and said, "Hey, by the way, we are going to create a wave of democracy across the Middle East." That was February of 2003, and by that time they hadn't planned anything. In October of 2003, Donald Rumsfeld wrote a memo asking questions that should have been asked in 2001: Do we have an overall strategy to win the war on terror? Do we have the right organization to win the war on terror? How are we going to know if we are not winning the war on terror?"
The first 136 comments are shown. Show all 421 comments »
Submit a Story
Advertisement
