Generals: Troops need to stay in Iraq

[Gunny]

BAGHDAD - U.S. military commanders said Friday the troop buildup in Iraq must be maintained until at least next summer and they may need as long as two years to ensure parts of the country are stable.

The battlefield generals' pleas for more time come in the face of growing impatience in the United States and a push on Capitol Hill to begin withdrawing U.S. troops as soon as this fall.

cont ...http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070721/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/iraq_us_troops

Now if it was ONE dissenting general, 3 libs would already have this posted in three different forums.

 

[CSM]

Now if it was ONE dissenting general, 3 libs would already have this posted in three different forums.

Obviously, these commanders are the "wrong" ones. How could they be so ignorant? Don't they know they are doomed to failure?

 

[Gunny]

Obviously, these commanders are the "wrong" ones. How could they be so ignorant? Don't they know they are doomed to failure?

Of course they do. The just want to drag it out until they can retire.

 

[dilloduck]

Of course they do. The just want to drag it out until they can retire.

They have to say what Bush wants them to say or they will be shot.

 

[Gunny]

They have to say what Bush wants them to say or they will be shot.

Sent to GTMO and tor ...errr.."interrogated."

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Don't you know? The evil idiot savant Bush and his mastermind Rove specifcally groomed these Generals 20 plus years ago knowing they would be needed now.

 

[Alucard]

Obviously the Generals in the field are delusional and should be relieved of
duty...

No Libs on this thread..... Thats odd...

 

[CSM]

Obviously the Generals in the field are delusional and should be relieved of
duty...

No Libs on this thread..... Thats odd...

Not odd at all. Just as soon as they figure out how to denigrate the generals in question, they'll be posting in droves.

 

[Gunny]

Not odd at all. Just as soon as they figure out how to denigrate the generals in question, they'll be posting in droves.

Or find some corporal somewhere who disagrees with the generals.

 

[CSM]

Or find some corporal somewhere who disagrees with the generals.

Barring any of that, I am sure we will see at least one post declare that it doesn't matter what the generals think because the military is run by civilians. The civilians are, of course, much smarter and better qualified than the generals.

 

[dilloduck]

Barring any of that, I am sure we will see at least one post declare that it doesn't matter what the generals think because the military is run by civilians. The civilians are, of course, much smarter and better qualified than the generals.

WOT opponents need time to regroup after making such a big deal out of the fact that Bush wasn't listening to his generals on the ground. They have been exposed again

 

[Gunny]

Barring any of that, I am sure we will see at least one post declare that it doesn't matter what the generals think because the military is run by civilians. The civilians are, of course, much smarter and better qualified than the generals.

Well, yeah, they've done such a bang up job to this point ....

 

[DeadCanDance]

Bush Says Attacks Are Reflection of U.S. Gains

Washington Post

President Bush yesterday put the best face on a new surge of violence in Iraq as his top defense aides huddled to discuss additional ways of thwarting the anti-American rebellion there before it becomes more widespread.

The president, speaking after attacks on police stations and a Red Cross facility in Iraq killed at least 35 people, said such attacks should be seen as a sign of progress because they show the desperation of those who oppose the U.S.-led occupation.

"The more successful we are on the ground, the more these killers will react," Bush said as he sat in the Oval Office with L. Paul Bremer, the U.S. administrator in Iraq. He added: "The more progress we make on the ground, the more free the Iraqis become, the more electricity is available, the more jobs are available, the more kids that are going to school, the more desperate these killers become, because they can't stand the thought of a free society."

Bush's senior diplomats were somewhat more measured than their boss in their assessments of the Iraq situation. …. "We'll have rough days, such as we've had the last couple of days. But the overall thrust is in the right direction, and the good days outnumber the bad days."

The U.S. strategy is to turn over security missions to Iraqi soldiers and police forces as quickly as possible. …….A senior intelligence official told The Washington Post that the United States has a window of three to six months to put down the resistance.

These statements and predictions were from 2003 -four years ago

Above from an Article By Dana Milbank and Thomas E. Ricks Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, October 28, 2003; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A23470-2003Oct27?language=printer


The Gig is up. No sane person any longer believes any predictions of success from Bush, or any of his diplomats or Generals.

 

[Gunny]

These statements and predictions were from 2003 -four years ago

Above from an Article By Dana Milbank and Thomas E. Ricks Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, October 28, 2003; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A23470-2003Oct27?language=printer


The Gig is up. No sane person any longer believes any predictions of success from Bush, or any of his diplomats or Generals.

Don't know where you dredged that up from, but the article posted as the basis for discussion says: "U.S. military commanders said Friday ... "

By the current math of the day, that was yesterday.

 

[DeadCanDance]

Don't know where you dredged that up from, but the article posted as the basis for discussion says: "U.S. military commanders said Friday ... "

By the current math of the day, that was yesterday.

You didn’t read what I wrote.

I said nobody but wingnut koolaid guzzlers any longer believe Bush, his diplomate, or his generals.

Bush appoints the Generals in Iraq. They are not going to undercut him. Their public statements are going to broadly conform to what the Bush “strategy” is. Or they quit, and speak out against Bush, like several former Iraq Generals have.

Are you still buying the bullshit anybody - generals, diplomats, officials - associated with the Bush admin says about iraq? And if so, why?


Here’s previous predictions and statements By Bush’s Generals that were way off base:

Rumsfeld, Casey Defend Status of Iraqi Forces By Al Pessin
Washington

30 September 2005

U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his top general in Iraq tried to clarify Friday a statement the general made on Thursday that appeared to indicate a decline in the capability of Iraq's new security forces. The secretary and the general said the Iraqi forces are improving every day, although only one unit is capable of operating without help from coalition forces.

Even though he says the Iraqi forces are improving, General Casey predicted it will be months before many more Iraqi units can operate on their own, and perhaps two years before he will be able to remove the U.S. training teams that are embedded in all the Iraqi military units, even the operationally independent ones.

http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2005-09/2005-09-30-voa69.cfm?CFID=105037259&CFTOKEN=75312292

This article is two years old. Times up. The Iraqi should be trained, operationally independent, and U.S. training teams removed.

U.S. General in Iraq Outlines Troop Cuts

By MICHAEL R. GORDON Published: June 25, 2006

WASHINGTON, June 24 — The top American commander in Iraq has drafted a plan that projects sharp reductions in the United States military presence there by the end of 2007, with the first cuts coming this September, American officials say.

According to a classified briefing at the Pentagon this week by the commander, Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the number of American combat brigades in Iraq is projected to decrease to 5 or 6 from the current level of 14 by December 2007.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/25/w...1dc3bd1a5ff247&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Times almost up. We should be getting down to 5 or 6 brigades in Iraq by this December.

 

[maineman]

the generals in the field execute the foreign policy of the United States. They have NEVER presumed to make it....

well...hardly ever, and MacArthur found out what happens then, and well he should have,

 

[Gunny]

You didn’t read what I wrote.

I said nobody but wingnut koolaid guzzlers any longer believe Bush, his diplomate, or his generals.

Bush appoints the Generals in Iraq. They are not going to undercut him. Their public statements are going to broadly conform to what the Bush “strategy” is. Or they quit, and speak out against Bush, like several former Iraq Generals have.

Are you still buying the bullshit anybody - generals, diplomats, officials - associated with the Bush admin says about iraq? And if so, why?


Here’s previous predictions and statements By Bush’s Generals that were way off base:



This article is two years old. Times up. The Iraqi should be trained, operationally independent, and U.S. training teams removed.




Times almost up. We should be getting down to 5 or 6 brigades in Iraq by this December.

I read what you wrote. When you get past the left-wingnut talking points in your post, there is no substance.

Doesn't get much easier than that.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Yup like I said Bush, knowing 20 to 30 years ago that he would be President and would be starting a war groomed a crop of men to be generals now so they would do as he wants. he also slipped in career diplomats at that time to help him also.

No wait, I know, he used Cheney's nintendo controller to bend time and space and go back and fix it for now. Ya thats the ticket.

 

[Nevadamedic]

Yup like I said Bush, knowing 20 to 30 years ago that he would be President and would be starting a war groomed a crop of men to be generals now so they would do as he wants. he also slipped in career diplomats at that time to help him also.

No wait, I know, he used Cheney's nintendo controller to bend time and space and go back and fix it for now. Ya thats the ticket.

Yup, and Cheney was is plant as President Ford's chief of staff and his dad's Defense Secretary...........

 

[DeadCanDance]

Yup like I said Bush, knowing 20 to 30 years ago that he would be President and would be starting a war groomed a crop of men to be generals now so they would do as he wants. he also slipped in career diplomats at that time to help him also.

No wait, I know, he used Cheney's nintendo controller to bend time and space and go back and fix it for now. Ya thats the ticket.

You don't appear to understand how the chain of command works. Our military is under the control of elected civilian leaders.

The president (Bush) appoints generals that broadly support implementing his policies, and fires or dismisses those who either don't support him, or who fail at implementing his policies:

When virtually all of Bush military line of command, including the entire Joint Chiefs of Staff, * opposed his "surge" proposal late last year, Bush responded not by listening, but by removing the top two commanders** responsible for Iraq and replacing them with more amenable leaders, including Army Lt. Gen. David H. Petraeus.

*http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/18/AR2006121801477.html

**http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/04/AR2007010402026.html

"When Bush and his aides shift military strategy, they seem to turn on the generals on whom they once relied publicly, said Lawrence Korb, a former Pentagon official. During the run-up to the war, when Gen. Eric Shinseki, the former Army chief of staff, told Congress that more troops were needed to secure Iraq, he was publicly rebuked by then-Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2007/07/16/BL2007071600891_pf.html

President Bush says that he should be trusted on military issues because he listens to his commanders. But he has a tendency to celebrate his generals when they're providing him political cover -- then stick a knife in their backs when they're no longer of any use to him. Last week, Bush rejected any blame for the chaos that ensued in Iraq after the March 2003 invasion. So whose fault was it? Bush pointed the finger at Gen. Tommy Franks, the Central Command chief at the time. "My primary question to General Franks was, do you have what it takes to succeed? And do you have what it takes to succeed after you succeed in removing Saddam Hussein? And his answer was, yes," Bush said.


http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/07/20070712-5.html