Food for thought

[leatherneck]

If the Democrats were/are right for criticizing the Bush administration for ignoring the advice of senior military advisors who were advising Bush to have a much larger military presence in Iraq, how can those same Democrats ignore the advise of General Petraeus and other military leaders who are advising against imposing a timeline for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq?

 

Any one? Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?

[acemona]

If the Democrats were/are right for criticizing the Bush administration for ignoring the advice of senior military advisors who were advising Bush to have a much larger military presence in Iraq, how can those same Democrats ignore the advise of General Petraeus and other military leaders who are advising against imposing a timeline for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq?

 

Any one? Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?

 

The problem is that Bush kept firing all of the other leaders who disagreed with an open ended program and kept hiring new ones until he found one who agreed with his position.

 

I am pretty sure that congress is falling right in line with commission that Bush created but ignored.

[leatherneck]

The problem is that Bush kept firing all of the other leaders who disagreed with an open ended program and kept hiring new ones until he found one who agreed with his position.

 

I am pretty sure that congress is falling right in line with commission that Bush created but ignored.

 

 

So you are saying Gen. Petreaus is not qualified to give advise? Or he's lying? Or is a "yes man" to Bush? And which military leaders exactly did Bush fire? Some specifics please to back up your post?

[Run To State]

So you are saying Gen. Petreaus is not qualified to give advise? Or he's lying? Or is a "yes man" to Bush? And which military leaders exactly did Bush fire? Some specifics please to back up your post?

Haven't heard any yet. :sssh:

[Trinity alum]

I absolutely believe that President Bush has made a complete and total mess of Iraq, from the decision to start in the first place, to the management since the invasion, to the decision to ramp up our involvement. With that said, elections have consequences and we are paying now for our mistakes in 2000 and 2004. That means that he is the CIC and gets to decide. Congress will give him the money he needs, without binding restrictions, but only after they make sure that everyone knows that they don't like it. I seldom agree with Patrick Buchanan, but in this case he is right. Iraq is the biggest strategic blunder of modern American history, maybe ever. We will pay for it for a long time.

[Hearsay]

Noone still has answered LN's valid question, which is, can the Democrats ignore Gen. Petraeus?

[Trinity alum]

Noone still has answered LN's valid question, which is, can the Democrats ignore Gen. Petraeus?

The Democrats will, in the end, give the President the funding he wants. They will not leave the toops without funds. This is all about making sure that everyone knows they don't like it. As far as ignoring Petraeus, he is only the latest in a line of generals that someone has ignored. All of these guys, including the President, find someone they agree with and ignore everyone else.

[leatherneck]

Noone still has answered LN's valid question, which is, can the Democrats ignore Gen. Petraeus?

 

 

And if they can ignore him, how can the Democrats still criticize Bush for supposedly ignoring those generals who advocated more troops on the ground?

[acemona]

List of Generals Fired:

Zinni

Shinseki

Abizaid

Casey

 

Others military leaders asked to "resign"

Robert Preston

John Carr

karen Kwiatkowski

Richard Clarke

Michael Dugan

 

Foreign Affair Diplomats who resigned b/c Bush would not heed their advice

Flynt Leverett

Ben Miller

Hillary Mann

Ann Wright

[leatherneck]

List of Generals Fired:

Zinni

Shinseki

Abizaid

Casey

 

Others military leaders asked to "resign"

Robert Preston

John Carr

karen Kwiatkowski

Richard Clarke

Michael Dugan

 

Foreign Affair Diplomats who resigned b/c Bush would not heed their advice

Flynt Leverett

Ben Miller

Hillary Mann

Ann Wright

 

I don't have the time to check all of these names to verify that Bush indeed fired them because they disagreed with his post invasion decisions, but as to General Zinni, you need to know that he was the Commander of Cent Com from 97-2000 under Clinton. He retired in August of 2000. If Bush forced him out in August of 2000, years before we invaded Iraq, Bush can see into the future. I respect General Zinni. He was a good Marine. But there is only one former Marine that's right all the time, and he's typing this post:banana: (just ask my wife, she'll tell you).

[acemona]

I don't have the time to check all of these names to verify that Bush indeed fired them because they disagreed with his post invasion decisions, but as to General Zinni, you need to know that he was the Commander of Cent Com from 97-2000 under Clinton. He retired in August of 2000. If Bush forced him out in August of 2000, years before we invaded Iraq, Bush can see into the future. I respect General Zinni. He was a good Marine. But there is only one former Marine that's right all the time, and he's typing this post:banana: (just ask my wife, she'll tell you).

 

you are correct, I assume as always:D , Zinni was just a critic.

[leatherneck]

you are correct, I assume as always:D , Zinni was just a critic.

 

 

The fact of the matter is with every major military operation (and some not so major military operation) there will always be those military folks that agree with the strategy and those that don't. When things don't go as planned (and it rarely does, particularly the major ones) those who were against the plan come out of the wood work saying "I told you so".

 

 

 

People need to realize that Bush probably got more different advise than I have pounds, and that's a lot. But at the end of the day, you have to make a decision. He listened to them all and then decided to follow the advise of Rumsfeld. I realize that folks think Rummy is a dummy, but people need to remember that he was a highly credentialed and highly experienced on military matters. More than perhaps any Sec Def that we've ever had. And keep in mind that a lot of military leaders were agreeing with Rumsfeld.

 

For what its worth, I got to watch a few minutes of the ABC morning new segment on Tues. Diane Sawyer was talking to retired Army General Keane, a consultant to ABC on military affairs. He was so pro-surge strategy I couldn't believe ABC had him on. He fully supported the surge strategy; his only criticism is that its taking to long to get all the troops over there. And I agree with that criticism.

 

I believe with every fiber of my body that the surge would work if we'd just stop encouraging the insurgents and stop demoralizing our troops and the Iraqi people that support us by stopping the "Iraq is lost" political rhetoric flying around. It will take time, but it will work. We just need to stop the grandstanding for the presidential election in 08.

 

I fully realize that to some extent the Republicans made this bed they are sleeping in by treating the Democrats poorly when the Republicans were in control. We are only now getting what they dished out. But I naively I guess wish the Democrats would realize what's at stake in Iraq and rise above the "get even" mentality. Rather than making issues for political gain, let Bush run the operation. If come election time next year things have not improved, there will be a Democrat in the White House who can then call his own shots. Until then, respectfully disagree with Bush but tell the world as long as Bush is Pres and calling the shots, we support him and his decisions.

[H]

The Bush administration has ignored the advice of seasoned military leaders regarding Iraq from the beginning of invasion "planning" to present. The actual invasion and operation defeat Saddam's military was spectacularly successful (although all the "Shock and Awe" doctrine seems to have accomplished was to destroy valuable infrastructure that we are still struggling to rebuild). However, there were clear warning signs from both senior military and ex-military and from within other sources in the Pentagon that bringing an invasion of Iraq to a successful outcome would involve far, far more than just pounding the Republican Guard with M1A1's and F15's.

 

The Pentagon simulated a U.S. invasion of Iraq in a 1999 series of war games called 'Desert Crossing', out of which came a recommended invasion strength of close to 400,000 troops to provide security in the immediate post-invasion period. General Eric Shinseki, the chief military advisor to the President on Army matters, testified before Congress that he believed an invasion force on the order of several hundred thousand troops would be required for post-war Iraq. The Bush Administration obviously didn't take such recommendations seriously, if it paid them any attention at all. Colin Powell rightly pointed out that Iraq falls into the category of "if you break it, you own it", in his famous "Pottery Barn" analogy. Interestingly enough, Powell has since stated that Bush's so-called surge "will not work" (Face the Nation, 12/17/06). Active duty senior military officers have always been extremely resistant to publicly disagree with policy decisions. They always will be, because for the head of the Army or Marines to publicly state that they think the Commander in Chief is wrong would undermine the effectiveness of rank throughout the military. What has happened when said senior military officers have retired? They come out of the woodwork in criticism of Bush's Iraq policies . Anthony Zinni (retired Marine Corps General), Joseph Hoar (retired Marine Corps General), William Odom (retired Army General), Barry McCaffrey (retired Army General), John Abizaid (retired Army General), Paul Eaton (retired Army General), Robert Scales (retired Army General), and literally dozens of others have made strong public statements critical of Bush military policies. That simply does not square with the story we've been fed about an Administration that listens to its active military commanders.

 

Does General Petraeus publicly support Bush's policies? Of course. Would you expect the person in his position not to?

[H]

Forgive me and the majority of the American people for being skeptical of this President's statements where Iraq is concerned. He and his minions have been wrong about very nearly everything where the Iraq war is concerned.

 

- The bogus 9/11 connection

- The nonexistant WMD's

- The undersized invasion force

- The assertion that invading Iraq would make America safer from terrorism

- The wildly understated costs of the war

- The prediction of being greeted as liberators

- The disbanding of the Iraqi military

- The declaration of the insurgency being in its last throes

- The overstated significance of numerous meaningless elections

- The 2005 statement that more troops were not needed

- The 2007 surge ordering more troops

 

Quite frankly, I'm impressed that there are Bush supporters who can still draw up to their computer keyboards and, in spite of their innermost disillusionment with his failed presidency, summon the resolve to articulate an argument in his favor.

[titletownclown]

Quite frankly, I'm impressed that there are Bush supporters who can still draw up to their computer keyboards and, in spite of their innermost disillusionment with his failed presidency, summon the resolve to articulate an argument in his favor.

 

In keeping with responses that seem to be so popular these days on BGP.................................................................................................................:sleep: :sleep: :sleep: :sleep: :sleep: :sleep: yadayadayada