Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

RUMSFELD UNDER FIRE(Wesley Clark has accused Rumsfeld of putting troops at risk )
SKY NEWS ^ | 03/26/2003 | SKYNEWS

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."


TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 361-380381-400401-420 ... 481-485 next last
To: Pokey78
Wesley Clark Supreme Allied Commander Europe is one of many Pampered Princes who played the Clinton game. Read on...

Wesley Clark - A War Criminal?

For those in the audience who did not have a flier, I began to explain the picture which showed General Clark in a congratulatory handshake with Hashim Thaci, leader of the KLA, which under the noses of KFOR had murdered or ethnically cleansed thousands of Kosovo Serbs and had destroyed more Orthodox Christian churches and monasteries than were destroyed in 500 years under the Ottoman Empire. Next to Thaci was Bernard Kouchner, Chief U.N. administrator in Kosovo, British General Sir Michael Jackson, and Agim Ceku, who commanded the Croatian Army in "Operation Storm" that ethnically cleansed 250,000 Serbs from Krajina and murdered thousands and who now commands the Kosovo Protection Corps (KPC), the thinly disguised successor to the KLA. It should be noted that the KLA, with whom we allied ourselves, at one time was designated by the U.S. State Department as a terrorist organization. Of course, this is the same KLA about whom Senator Joe Lieberman said: "The United States of America and the Kosovo Liberation Army stand for the same values and principles . . . Fighting for the KLA is fighting for human rights and American values." (Washington Post, Apr.28, 1999). Clark at Borders bookstore, Pentagon Center Mall, 17 Jul 2001 by Colonel George Jatras, USAF (Ret.)

At the beginning of the Kosovo conflict,CounterPunch delved into the military career of General Wesley Clark and discovered that his meteoric rise through the ranks derived from the successful manipulation of appearances: faking the results of combat exercises, greasing to superiors and other practices common to the general officer corps. We correctly predicted that the unspinnable realities of a real war would cause him to become unhinged. Given that Clark attempted to bomb the CNN bureau in Belgrade and ordered the British General Michael Jackson to engage Russian troops in combat at the end of the war, we feel events amply vindicated our forecast. With the end of hostilities it has become clear even to Clark that most people, apart from some fanatical members of the war party in the White House and State Department, consider the general, as one Pentagon official puts it, "a horse's ass". Defense Secretary William Cohen is known to loathe him, and has seen to it that the Hammer of the Serbs will be relieved of the Nato command two months early. Gen. Wesley Clark Fights On and On [freerepublic.com]

381 posted on 03/27/2003 12:11:39 AM PST by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: info_scout
I conceed NOTHING !

I can't and shouldn't be expected to " respect " an opinion based on spurious spewings and fog.

You TOO, if you cared to, could read the same books that I have, as they are all available in English.

I answer your posts ; you answer NO ONE'S ! ANSWER ALL OF THE QUESTION , I AND OTHERS , HAVE ASKED OF YOU !

If you , again, refrain from responding, with ALL of the queries answered, then guess what ? YOU LOSE !

382 posted on 03/27/2003 12:11:52 AM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 369 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
>> Off topic; however, salient to the matter... WHOM DID YOU VOTE FOR IN 2000 ? Oh, and whom were you for in the primaries ?

I'll bypass your jabs at grammar and word usage, although you might want to review your verbiage.

I supported W prior to the primaries of 2000, although I was wary of the elements within his camp 'chomping at the bit' to pursue a radical agenda with Iraq.
383 posted on 03/27/2003 12:13:28 AM PST by info_scout
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 330 | View Replies]

To: AHerald
Well .. shhh ... I lied about Barbeau.
384 posted on 03/27/2003 12:15:25 AM PST by ArneFufkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 379 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
FR isn't 10 years old ! Where did he claim this ? LOL
385 posted on 03/27/2003 12:15:43 AM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 377 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
Oh, I was just mocking some people who have said that lately.

And that was the obvious answer........LOL.
386 posted on 03/27/2003 12:16:33 AM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 385 | View Replies]

To: info_scout
Those "jabs of grammar" are correct usuage, dummy.
387 posted on 03/27/2003 12:17:12 AM PST by Carolinamom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 383 | View Replies]

To: info_scout
My grammar and word usage are without peer, dear; unlike you.

That wasn't the ONLY question asked of you. Thanks for answering ONE ; now make a stab at ALL of the others. :-)

388 posted on 03/27/2003 12:18:31 AM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 383 | View Replies]

To: ArneFufkin
LOL!
389 posted on 03/27/2003 12:18:54 AM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 384 | View Replies]

To: Carolinamom
"jabs AT grammar", usuage = usage
390 posted on 03/27/2003 12:19:10 AM PST by Carolinamom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 387 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
CNN just covered a American Bradley going up in smoke in Najev. They seemed delighted!

$$^e#^%^&^%$^&%^&%ew#w#$%##@@%#%w^%e$&e$%@

391 posted on 03/27/2003 12:19:11 AM PST by Cold Heat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 382 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
OT

>>>...ND WILL YOU VOTE , IN 2004, FOR PRESIDENT BUSH ? ...<<<

Is he running in 2004? I don't recall that he announced. So far just a boatload of Democrat clowns in the race.
392 posted on 03/27/2003 12:19:19 AM PST by info_scout
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 341 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
ROTFLMSO
393 posted on 03/27/2003 12:19:42 AM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 386 | View Replies]

To: info_scout
Two more Democratic pretty boys!
394 posted on 03/27/2003 12:20:27 AM PST by Swampmarine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: wirestripper
@&&***%%#**&%%#@@
!
I bet old, info_scout is happy as all getout too. NURTZ !
395 posted on 03/27/2003 12:21:21 AM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 391 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
>>>Just as I thought; a disruptor. <<<

No, actually I've mostly lurked since the first night Drudge linked to FR in (I think) early '97.
396 posted on 03/27/2003 12:21:32 AM PST by info_scout
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 352 | View Replies]

To: info_scout
Sell crazy somewhere else. Nobody's buying that crap here.
397 posted on 03/27/2003 12:22:30 AM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 396 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
What's I tell you: he says he's been lurking for seven years. :-)
398 posted on 03/27/2003 12:23:19 AM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 395 | View Replies]

To: info_scout
Unless he pulls an LBJ, which is so far removed from the realms of possibilities, President Bush WILL be running in 2004. Is even this simple, logical assumption beyond your ken ?

And you demand that the rest of us take heed of YOUR opinions and see them as valid ?

Please answer ALL of the previously asked and not responded to queries , heretofore put to you. Elsewise, you FOREFIT any further resonse and consideration. :-)

399 posted on 03/27/2003 12:26:01 AM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 392 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
And he expects US to swallow that balderdash as whole cloth ! SEVEN YEARS ? SEVEN YEARS LURKING, BEFORE HE JOINED ON 3-30-02 ?

He doesn't know ANYTHING about war, history, the meaning od simple words, and he can't do math ! :-)

400 posted on 03/27/2003 12:29:29 AM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 398 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 361-380381-400401-420 ... 481-485 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson