Posted on 03/26/2003 8:08:17 PM PST by KQQL
The former supreme allied commander of Nato has accused US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld of putting allied troops at risk through poor planning.
Wesley Clark said Mr Rumsfeld's insistence on a smaller invasion force had left troops vulnerable and the 300-mile oil supply line between Kuwait and Basra open to guerilla attack.
Troops had been tied up in "messy fighting" around Nasiriyah and Baghdad, he said, leading to "logistics problems".
He added that hopes of a quick victory spurred by a popular revolt against Saddam had been dashed.
"The simple fact is that the liberation didn't quite occur. They didn't rise up."
Other war veterans have also spoken out against the early stages of war planning.
Miscalculations
Ralph Peters, a military scientist and former Army officer, wrote in the Washington Post that a coalition victory would be achieved "despite serious strategic miscalculations by the office of the Defence Secretary".
The "shock and awe" strategy of aerial bombardment had failed to shatter the will of Saddam's regime, he said, and if anything had encouraged greater resistance.
"It delayed essential attacks on Iraq's military capabilities," said Mr Peters. "This encouraged at least some Iraqis in uniform to believe they had a chance to fight and win.
"Now our forces advancing on Baghdad face the possibility of more serious combat than would otherwise have been the case."
Coalition commander General Tommy Franks's draft invasion plan proposed using four or five heavy divisions moving slowly towards Baghdad.
New warfare
Mr Rumsfeld is said to have rejected this, complaining that it was too similar to the strategy used in the 1991 Gulf War. Instead he insisted on a smaller, lighter force relying heavily on special forces and air power.
Retired US Army General Barry McCaffrey, commander of the 24th Infantry Division 12 years ago, said Mr Rumsfeld had ignored warnings that he was underestimating the number of troops needed.
"I think he thought these were generals with feet planted in World War Two who didn't understand the new way of warfare," he said.
"If the Iraqis actually fight it's going to be brutal, dangerous work and we could take a couple to 3,000 casualties."
Mr Rumsfeld insisted his strategy was working.
"It's a good plan everybody agrees to, and it is a plan that in four and a half or five days has moved ground forces to within a short distance of Baghdad."
Tough talk from the perv whose tail hasn't left middle school.
Actually, I was so incensed that I could not think straight.
In retrospect, if NATO wanted to do it, then we had to be involved. I just did not care for the plan.
There sure must have been better ways to skin that cat. The media drove that war and the method. The media did alot of things and continues to do them, but they do not have their buddy in office.
The rats have not been exteminated however. They lie in wait for another opportunity to make the world in their own distorted image.
Rant over..............
Never, ever got close to that number.
And the Kosovo operation had additional parameters:
To deplete the arsenal.
To distract from the Cox Report.
To give Jiang Zemin a foreign devil to distract his unhappy billions.
To further the cause of Islamofascism.
Much like " quagmire ", an overused / misused word, fondly employed my extreme lefties, when talking about anything , at all, that a GOPer plans to do/ does.
The person ( info_scout ), who employed this word, referring to the FIRST SEVEN DAYS of this war, doesn't know the meaning of this word. He is parroting erronious codswallop; yet claims to be " making up his own mind."
Yes, WE are going to win this war. In the end, the difficult job will be bringing our democratic , REPUBLIC type of governance to Iraq; however, we shall prevail.
No war, in all of recorded history, runs a smooth path. Yes, there are good days, bad days, and usually absolutely horrific days. Those, who haven't even a tenuous grasp of history, battles, and reality, spew garbage and imagine it to be brilliant, pearls of wisdom. If ONLY people would NOT talk about things they know little to NOTHING about, FR wouldn't have to spend so much money on wasted bandwidtdh. :-)
These are legitimate disputes among professional military men, all of whom know we are going to win the war and do so lopsidedly. The press, defeatists, and peaceniks glom onto those discussions and try to blow them out of proportion. And some noticing that think there is no real discussion or reason for the criticism. Both are wrong.
There was method A and method B of getting the job done, and B was riskier but might have been feasible with half the ground force. They tried B with A as the fall back plan. Some said all along they'd need A, and they were probably right (we will know mroe clearly in 3-7 more days). It was and is a legitimate professional military dispute, and not political carping or alarmism or defeatism. The only thing at stake in it is how fast and how clean the win will be. But worrying about that is their job.
The Turkish problem is what made it a serious issue. (The early 101 blow up also did not help). If the 4th Mech were already in country, things would already be a lot farther along. As it is they will be there reasonably quickly, and 2 more heavy divisions are on stand by, if needed. I think it would be prudent to plan on sending them and get that geared up. Better safe than sorry, at this point.
The year FBI agent Gary Aldrich wrote Unlimited Access, Ron Brown was flown into a Croatian mountain, TWA Flight 800 was hit by a CIA cartoon, and Al Gore's Wang Jun tryst at the Hsi Lai Temple helped put the co-Commissars over the top.
McAffrey is another dangerous fool a la Clark.
The first air strikes on any campaign are ALWAYS command and control.
This particular strike on Saddam was a target of opportunity that had to be approved by Bush. In fact they debated it for two and a half hours while the planes were scrambled and the missle codes were up-loaded and on the way. They could have called it back at any time.
The war really did not start then. this was a simple and basic opportunity that presented it's self. they never anticipated it, not was it part of the plan.
I just so happened that they were about ready to launch the strikes, so there was nothing to loose and everything to gain.
All having TV commentary jobs.
And I laughed. Did you?
Is that some kind of fad now?
You may not have voted for Bill ; however, you two have the same difficulty with plain English words, dear.
The GREATNESS of FR ( now saddly long past ), was its members intellect, prowess in comprehension , and writing ability. An idiotic opinion, based on abject lack of knowledge, incomprehension, is best kept to yourself ... unless you enjoy being slammed about , as you deservedly have been done on this thread, and care little for substantial, logical discourse, based of facts. :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.