Ex-General: 'No End in Sight' in Iraq

#1
W

WA_Vol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2005
Messages
18,663
Likes
12
#1
By STEVEN KOMAROW

ARLINGTON, Va. (AP) - The U.S. mission in Iraq is a "nightmare with no end in sight" because of political misjudgments after the fall of Saddam Hussein that continue today, a former chief of U.S.-led forces said Friday.
Retired Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, who commanded coalition troops for a year beginning June 2003, cast a wide net of blame for both political and military shortcomings in Iraq that helped open the way for the insurgency - such as disbanding the Saddam-era military and failing to cement ties with tribal leaders and quickly establish civilian government after Saddam was toppled.
He called current strategies - including the deployment of 30,000 additional forces earlier this year - a "desperate attempt" to make up for years of misguided policies in Iraq.
"There is no question that America is living a nightmare with no end in sight," Sanchez told a group of journalists covering military affairs.
Sanchez avoided singling out at any specific official. But he did criticize the State Department, the National Security Council, Congress and the senior military leadership during what appeared to be a broad indictment of White House policies and a lack of leadership to oppose them.
Such assessments - even by former Pentagon brass - are not new, but they have added resonance as debates over war strategy dominate the presidential campaign.
The Bush administration didn't directly address Sanchez's critical views.
"We appreciate his service to the country," said White House spokesman Trey Bohn. He added that as U.S. commander in Iraq Gen. David Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker have said: "There is more work to be done, but progress is being made in Iraq and that's what we're focused on now."
Sanchez retired from the Army last year, two years after he completing a tumultuous year as commander of all U.S. forces in Iraq. As he stepped down, he called his career a casualty of the Abu Ghraib prison scandal.
He was never charged with anything but he was not promoted in the aftermath of the prisoner abuse reports. He was criticized by some for not doing more to avoid mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners.
Sanchez told the gathering that he thought he had made mistakes and said he didn't always fully appreciate the secondary affects of actions the military took.
He did deny reports that he and then-Iraqi administrator L. Paul Bremer were not on speaking terms. He said they spoke every day.
The retired soldier stressed that it became clear during his command that the mission was severely handicapped because the State Department and other agencies were not adequately contributing to a mission that could not be won by military force alone.
When asked when he saw that the mission was going awry, he responded: "About the 15th of June 2003" - the day he took command.
"There is nothing going on today in Washington that would give us hope" that things are going to change, he said.
Sanchez went on to offer a pessimistic view on the current U.S. strategy against extremists will make lasting gains, but said a full-scale withdrawal also was not an option.
"The American military finds itself in an intractable situation ... America has no choice but to continue our efforts in Iraq," said Sanchez, who works as a consultant training U.S. generals.
Click to expand...

My Way News - Ex-General: 'No End in Sight' in Iraq
 
#3
#3
Fox News was quick to speculate that the reason Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez is blasting the Bush Administration is because he is bitter about his discharge.

Yeah, I'm sure that's the reason. Gimme a break. :rtfm:
 
#5
#5
Yep, and you can't take the Washington Times seriously because it's owned by Sun Yung Moon.

The Fox News resistance is almost as ridiculous as liberals claiming they support the troops.

btw, here's an excerpt from Sanchez' speech that isn't getting a lot of media attention.

It is astounding to me when I hear the vehement disagreement with the military’s forays into information operations that seek to disseminate the truth and inform the Iraqi people in order to counter our enemy’s blatant propaganda. As I assess various media entities, some are unquestionably engaged in political propaganda that is uncontrolled.
Click to expand...

I wonder why that is?
 
#6
#6
I think it's quite hillarious that you have someone blasting the administration on this whole debacle who is not a Democrat politician, member of MoveOn.org, vast left-wing media conspiracy, etc. The Bush and Iraq war apologists are cringing their teeth trying to find ways to discredit this guy when he was one of the key players from the beginning.
 
#7
#7
MG1968 said:
Yep, and you can't take the Washington Times seriously because it's owned by Sun Yung Moon.

The Fox News resistance is almost as ridiculous as liberals claiming they support the troops.

btw, here's an excerpt from Sanchez' speech that isn't getting a lot of media attention.



I wonder why that is?
Click to expand...

Was he referring to Al Jazeera and those types of networks? Or was he referring to American media of which are Constitutionally protected?
 
#10
#10
no, that he has a problem with US media outlets quoting Al Qaeda sources that haven't been fully vetted yet are treated as if what they say is gospel truth. The flipside of that is the media lynching that occurred after Haditha. Those marines were convicted before they ever went to trial by both the media and members of Congress. Now that they've all been acquitted, the media treats it as a non-story and Jack Murtha won't answer any calls to apologize. The same thing goes for recent casualty figures dropping by half for the month of August. CNN and WaPo reporters don't think that's news at all.

I'm sure he's all for their rights to print what they want, but I'm sure he'd like it if the NYT, WaPo, et al would publish a story on some of the good that has been done and is being done on a daily basis.
 
#11
#11
MG1968 said:
The Fox News resistance is almost as ridiculous as liberals claiming they support the troops.
Click to expand...

Years later and I am still seeing this garbage spewed by the right-wing?

I thought we moved passed this specific argument...a year or so ago

Sigh...some things don't change
 
#12
#12
U-T said:
Years later and I am still seeing this garbage spewed by the right-wing?

I thought we moved passed this specific argument...a year or so ago

Sigh...some things don't change
Click to expand...

no they don't. I'm still waiting for the left to show some support. Instead I see Code Pink vandalizing recruiting offices.
 
#14
#14
MG1968 said:
I'm still waiting for the left to show some support.
Click to expand...

We get it. You want to be that hardcore Republican who likes to get all big & bad on the internet and slam the left with the "You hate the men serving" line which always is a good zinger across the computer. :whistling:

I think the biggest joke of this war has been how many people in this country try to talk for the men serving. Whether we know who is "really" supporting us, troop morale, etc....:crazy:
 
#15
#15
U-T said:
We get it. You want to be that hardcore Republican who likes to get all big & bad on the internet and slam the left with the "You hate the men serving" line which always is a good zinger across the computer. :whistling:

I think the biggest joke of this war has been how many people in this country try to talk for the men serving. Whether we know who is "really" supporting us, troop morale, etc....:crazy:
Click to expand...

If you'd like, I'll scan and post both my Honorable Discharge and my DD form 214. I'm a veteran of the first Gulf War and served overall for 13 years. So don't think that my support for the troops is mired in some mindless right wing groupthink.
 
#17
#17
U-T said:
We get it. You want to be that hardcore Republican who likes to get all big & bad on the internet and slam the left with the "You hate the men serving" line which always is a good zinger across the computer. :whistling:

I think the biggest joke of this war has been how many people in this country try to talk for the men serving. Whether we know who is "really" supporting us, troop morale, etc....:crazy:
Click to expand...
The debate isn't about speaking for the men executing this war. It's more about allowing them to carry it to its military conclusion, rather than a half-cocked political "solution" from a slew of poorly informed political hacks. Politics has been the driver of the poorest decisions in the history of our government. While a poor decision might have gotten us to the place (and I, for the record, don't think it a poor decision), ending the conflict because of political pressure at this point would only exacerbate the problem. Hence, it can only hurt at this point to belittle the effort or those prosecuting this war. That's why you hear the questions regarding patriotism.
 
#18
#18
BigPapaVol said:
ending the conflict because of political pressure at this point would only exacerbate the problem.
Click to expand...

Even worse, continuing it because one side doesn't want to admit that the bumbling mistake is in fact...a mistake

Pride is a very under-rated factor in this country. Many in the political world would rather die then to come out and admit that something they support is a failure.
 
#19
#19
U-T, could you elaborate a litte bit when you told me things were bad in Iraq now?

You've been there and know what the reality is over there better then most anyone else.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top