A huge 'bow wave' of pent-up, expensive fixes is now required...and still going largely unfunded because of the enormity of the neglect.
We will all rue the day.
Posted on 04/19/2006 6:55:34 AM PDT by Paul Ross
Gen. Anthony Zinni: USS Cole Blunder Is My FaultReprinted from NewsMax.com
Tuesday, April 18, 2006 12:09 p.m. EDT
Former CENTCOM Commander, Gen. Anthony Zinni - who has called for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to resign because of Rumsfeld's alleged incompetence in running the Iraq war - admitted six years ago that he made the disastrous decision to have the USS Cole use the port of Aden, Yemen for refueling, where the ship was blown up by al-Qaida terrorists.
Worse still, at least one report indicates that Gen. Zinni may have played a role in an August 1998 leak that tipped off Osama bin Laden to an impending U.S. cruise missile attack - allowing the top terrorist to escape.
Testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee in October 2000, a week after the Cole attack, the then-recently retired Zinni said: "I pass that buck on to nobody."
The Rumsfeld critic explained that he personally signed off on berthing the Cole in Yemen even though "their coast is a sieve for terrorists."
"The threat conditions in Aden were better than elsewhere," he insisted, citing risk assessments for Sudan and Saudi Arabia.
Gen. Zinni said that cutbacks in the size of the Navy's fleet during the Clinton years made it necessary to use regional ports for refueling, noting: "Ten years ago, we did all refueling at sea" using Navy oilers.
Still, prior to the Cole attack, there's no record that Gen. Zinni ever complained about Clinton era defense cuts.
In what may be an even more troubling development, a report indicates that the leading Rumsfeld critic may have inadvertently played a role in tipping off Osama bin Laden to an impending U.S. cruise missile attack two years before the Cole episode.
Two days after President Clinton ordered the attack on bin Laden's encampment in Khost Afghanistan, the Associated Press reported:
"Kuwait's Al-Watan newspaper, quoting unidentified sources in London today, reported that Pakistan leaked to bin Laden news about an impending U.S. strike. The sources said the leak was aimed at limiting casualties, so that bin Laden would have less justification for a counterattack.
"A Pakistani government source, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that Gen. Anthony Zinni, commander of the U.S. Central Command, was in Peshawar the day before the attack to meet with Pakistani officials.
"Other Pakistani sources said Zinni came with a team of U.S. intelligence experts whose task was to pinpoint the camps and determine bin Laden's exact whereabouts."
A huge 'bow wave' of pent-up, expensive fixes is now required...and still going largely unfunded because of the enormity of the neglect.
We will all rue the day.
We are a retired and active duty Navy family. You are exactly right that we will rue the day, and it is happening now.
There goes his credibility, flying out the window.
It is not permissible for an active duty officer to complain publicly about the CIC. To compare his silence to his criticism, is frankly using words to slant the debate.
Zinni is a pro-Arab anti-Israel creep. Maybe he was a good Marine, but he's anti-Israel.
I'll bet the media will always identify him by saying ..."Bill Clinton supporter who's actions led to the bombing of the Cole"
Clinton most probaby told Zinni to let Osama know he's going to be bombed!!
You can't direct public and personal comments towards the CIC but Generals and Admirals can and do make policy statements about the status of their forces, although at some peril to their career. If Zinni had a problem with the drawdown of the fleet he certainly could have addressed that issue. These types of debate are usually carried out inside the military though, not in public.
And .. from what I understand about the incident - THERE WAS NO NEED FOR US TO PORT THERE - AS WE COULD HAVE REFUELED AT SEA.
We gave up so many of our military to the whims of the STINKING DEMOCRATS. When is the general public going to get a clue ..??
So what I'm reading here is Zinni says it was his fault because the USS Cole was attacked by terrorists, but it was sire-slime-clinton's fault because he cut back the military so bad they had to gas at a port, hence, they got blown-up???
What does this have to do with Rummie? He wasn't Secty. then????
This Zinni guy, in my opinion, is a loose cannon with a very big mouth and little brain....
.
He should have resigned in protest. And then spoken out.
Of course, he might have lost his pension, as Bill Clinton was abusing his authority to silence such opposition, with his supposedly "Republican" SecDef Bill Cohen. And note the MSM-complicity in effectuating the silencing back then to push their liberal censorship of uncomfortable realities [from Alamo-Girl's DSL]:
WorldNetDaiy 3/29/99 Geoff Metcalf “…From 1946 to 1991 the United States of America deployed military troops to eight foreign campaigns. From 1992 to the present (The Clinton reign), the United States of America has deployed military troops to 33 foreign places...According to what I consider reliable sources, in 1997 24 -- count 'em, twenty-four -- generals retired early. I am still in the processing of confirming names, dates and replacements (if any). On July 7, 1997, in what is being called a mass protest over the conditions in the military (primarily because of administration policy) 24 generals quit. They reportedly had fought a losing battle to correct, modify, or mitigate the politically correct, operational tempo, and repeated "hey you" deployments. They tried to address the problems with readiness (or lack of) and pay. They tried, and they failed to compel the administration to fix what is wrong. Then, in a final act of courage and commitment (two concepts alien to this administration), they ALL went to see Secretary of Defense Bill Cohen, and RESIGNED. Twenty-four general officers representing 600 years of combined military experience tendered their resignations. THAT is a big deal. ... So why haven't we heard about it? …”
Zinni is one of the Democrat ex-Generals calling for the resignation or firing of Donald Rumsfeld.
Thanks for the ping and DSL ditto!
In early 2000, Former Clinton CENTCOM commander, Anthony Zinni told Congress "Iraq remains the most significant near-term threat to U.S. interests in the Arabian Gulf region," adding, "Iraq probably is continuing clandestine nuclear research, [and] retains stocks of chemical and biological munitions ...
Even if Baghdad reversed its course and surrendered all WMD capabilities, it retains scientific, technical, and industrial infrastructure to replace agents and munitions within weeks or months."
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,192065,00.html
"If you allow someone like Saddam Hussein to get nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, chemical weapons, biological weapons, how many people is he going to kill with such weapons?
He's already demonstrated a willingness to use these weapons.
He poison-gassed his own people.
He used poison gas and other weapons of mass destruction against his neighbors.
This man has no compunction about killing lots and lots of people...."
-- Al Gore, Dec. 16, 1998
BTTT
Isn't amazing how all of the Clintoon whores and pimps have forgotten what they said about WMDS and Saddam during the Clintoon raping of Americans.
This is just another reason to stay with FR. for the truth on these bums.
I knew it wouldn't be long before the truth would come out on these traitors.
The DUmmies are happy to just fool some of the people, some of the time.
And the old media helps them with the cover-ups.
He's just pandering to the anti-war lunatic left for votes.
Brit Hume also exposed Zinni's previous statements before Congress in 2000.
Thanks for posting this. Some old FR threads posted after the attack on the Cole are an excellent reminder of how this ship was set up by Clintoon, Gore and apparently Zinni.
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a39fca442294c.htm
USS Cole Bombing: Yemen Government and Aden Port Operators Collaborate with Islamic Terrorists?
Crime/Corruption Breaking News News Keywords: USS COLE, YEMEN, ADEN, TERRORISM, BIN LADEN
Source: OKCSubmariner
Published: October 29, 2000 Author: Patrick B. Briley
Posted on 10/29/2000 14:27:14 PST by OKCSubmariner
The US investigation of the bombing of the USS Cole at the Yemen port of Aden has been blocked by Yemen authorities. CBS News reported on Friday, October 27,2000 that the government of Yemen had:
Tampered with evidence turned over to the US (which likely includes surveillance tapes and passports).
Disconnected phone lines with Yemeni officials who had cooperated with US investigators.
Refused to allow US investigators to interview many Islamic militants rounded up for questioning.
The CBS report is further corroborated by a New York Post article “Yemen Won’t Let FBI Grill Cole Suspects” dated October 28, 2000 and written by Niles Lathem.
The cause of the Yemen blockage of the USS Cole bombing investigation could possibly be attributed to the involvement of Yemen’s President, Ali-Abdullah Saleh, with Islamic terrorists as well as with wealthy Saudi business families, connected to terrorist Bin Laden and who have economic control of the port of Aden.
The following paragraphs are from a UPI story written by Eli J. Lake and published on Friday, 13 October 2000 and entitled “ For U.S., warning signs emerged in days before Yemen refueling stop”:
One such head of state is Yemen's President Ali-Abdullah Saleh, who told the Qatar-based satellite network Al-Jazeera on Monday (10/9/2000), "All Arabs are urged to support the Palestinian intifada (uprising) through various political and economic means and in the defense field." In speeches over the weekend,Saleh reportedly said he was opening his borders to mujahideen, or holy warriors. (My note: the Mujahideen are Bin Laden military men previously backed by the US against the Russians in Afghanistan.)
Hamas and Islamic Jihad even have official representatives in Yemen, while terrorist groups from Afghanistan to Algeria continue to operate out of the country. In an interview in March with the Christian Science Monitor, Ali Saleh Obad, the head of the opposition Yemen Socialist Party said: "This anti-terrorism is just propaganda -- it's just makeup on the system for the world to see."
He told the paper that Saleh's government still provides passports for numerous agents of terrorist groups.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1511084/posts
Able Danger warned of attack on USS Cole
TimesHerald ^ | 10/25/05 | KEITH PHUCAS
Posted on 10/28/2005 11:36:35 AM PDT by radar101
Senior Pentagon officials were warned not to let the USS Cole dock in Yemen two days before terrorists attacked the ship five years ago killing 17 sailors, according to Congressman Curt Weldon, who said the crucial intelligence was gleaned from the former secret defense operation, "Able Danger."
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a39f9e76a713d.htm
USS Cole: A Politically Correct Casuality?
Foreign Affairs Front Page News Keywords: USSCOLE, MILITARY READINESS
Source: The Washington Times
Published: October 27, 2000 Author: Paul Craig Roberts
Posted on 10/27/2000 13:36:58 PDT by Jeff Head
A political correctness casualty?
Paul Craig Roberts
The Washington Times
October 27, 2000
The USS Cole is a $1 billion high-tech missile warship. But it was no match for a rubber dinghy manned by two Arabs. The explosive-laden dinghy severely damaged the Cole and inflicted 56 casualties (17 dead, 39 injured) on a once-proud U.S. Navy.
The attack on the Cole showed a "great deal of sophistication," declared Richard Clarke, a top U.S. security official with the grand title of National Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection and Counterterrorism. On "60 Minutes" last Sunday, Mr. Clarke said the rubber dinghy attack was so sophisticated the U.S. is absolved of any suspicion of intelligence failure.
Listening to Mr. Clarke, one got the definite impression that an attack on the USS Cole with an Exocet missile would signify sophistication beyond comprehension.
There was nothing sophisticated about the attack on the Cole. Experts have pointed out that if the dinghy had been properly positioned, it would have set off the Cole's warheads and fuel tanks and blown the warship to pieces.
There can be no doubt, however, that the Arab attack was more sophisticated than the U.S. cover-up. Eight years of Clinton-Gore-Reno have proved that bald-faced lies lack consequence. Now everyone is getting in on the act. Mr. Clarke can go on national television and misrepresent an attack on a U.S. warship by a rubber dinghy as a highly sophisticated action outside the boundaries of prediction and defense.
Despite having the Cole's report, the Navy can't decide whether the attack on the Cole occurred earlier while entering port or later while docked. Obviously, a committee is searching for the least damaging explanation for the loss of a warship to a rubber dinghy.
What is being covered up is that the USS Cole and its sailors are victims of political correctness.
When a warship enters a potentially unfriendly port, it must be on alert. Unless the commander and crew are so green that they have never before entered a foreign port, officers and crew are familiar with the operation and capable of knowing that an unidentified rubber dinghy has no business coming alongside. Due diligence mandates the order to the dinghy to "stand off," followed by warning shots. If the dinghy persists, due diligence requires that it be blown out of the water.
Three kinds of political correctness prevented the Cole from protecting itself. The State Department doesn't want U.S. ships on alert, because it implies a lack of confidence in foreign "friends" that might give offense. We mustn't be undiplomatic even if U.S. property and lives are at stake.
The Cole's commander knew aggressive behavior on his part would be made an "incident" that politically correct Clinton-Gore appointees in the Pentagon and Office of the Secretary of the Navy would use to terminate his career.
Repeatedly, Clinton appointees have made it clear they regard the military services as "too aggressive" — that is, too male, and out of synch with the civilian population. Recall the recent punishments handed out to U.S. paratroopers who took their military duties in Kosovo seriously.
Years of "sensitivity training" have dulled the warrior spirit and the alertness factor that keeps a band of warriors alive. Commanders and troops are afraid to respond to a potential threat in a timely fashion. What if the threat turns out to be a misperception? The Arabs in the dinghy might only be out for a boat ride or bringing wares to hawk to the Cole's crew.
The Cole's commander could not know for certain the dinghy's purpose. But he did know for certain that if he caused an incident that proved to be unwarranted, he would have no support from Clinton's politically correct Navy. Political correctness has reversed the caution factor. A commander who uses caution to protect his ship is likely to be denounced as "macho-aggressive," whereas one who uses caution to guard against a politically incorrect act can lose his ship but save his career.
The damage inflicted on our armed forces by Clinton-Gore goes far beyond insufficient funding. Similarly, the readiness problem goes beyond undermanned and undertrained forces. Military personnel are afraid to act in a ready, or timely, fashion. Unable to risk the use of force, the USS Cole assisted its own demise.
Keep Digging! Unearth all the cock-roaches !
We must never forget. 
Electronics Technician Chief Petty Officer Richard Costelow Morrisville, Pennsylvania
Seaman James Rodrick McDaniels, Norfolk, Virginia
Signalman Seaman Recruit Cherone Louis Gunn, Rex, Georgia
Seaman Recruit Lakiba Nicole Palmer, San Diego, California
Operations Specialist Second Class Timothy Lamont Saunders, Ringgold, Virgina
Seaman Apprentice Craig Bryan Wibberley, Williamsport, Maryland
Mess Management Specialist Seaman Lakeina Monique Francis, Woodleaf, North Carolina
Engineman Second Class Marc Ian Nieto, Fond Du Lac, Wisconsin
Hull Maintenance Technician Third Class Kenneth Eugene Clodfelter, Mechanicsville, Virginia
Electronics Warfare Technician Second Class Ronald Scott Owens, Vero Beach, Florida
Fireman Apprentice Patrick Howard Roy, Keedysville, Maryland
Electronics Warfare Technician First Class Kevin Shawn Rux, Portland, North Dakota
Mess Management Specialist Third Class Ronchester Mananga Santiago, Kingsville, Texas
Firecontrolman Gary Graham Swenchonis, Jr., Rockport, Texas
Engineman Fireman Joshua Langdon Parlett, Churchville, Maryland
Fireman Apprentice Patrick Howard Roy, Keedysville, Maryland
Information Systems Technician Seaman Timothy Lee Gauna, Rice, Texas
That is an excellent article. In fact, I remember Inhofe taking to the floor of congress using many of these facts to berate the current state of the military, thanks to Clinton cutbacks. He specifically pointed out how we've had more military "deployments" under Clinton, than we had total since the end of WWII.
I also recall the early retirements by a number of Generals in protest of Clinton policy. Sadly, unlike today, the media never paid any attention to the underlying problems that existed within the Clinton DoD. Heck, you don't have to look any further than the number of hostile actions we took through the 90's and how the media never had any concern for collateral damage or civilian casualities.
Clinton bombed Iraq on 4 seperate occasions and never was there a concern for the damage it might have caused to the civilian population. Hell, as reporters poured into Iraq to count (and still count) the dead bodies that resulted from this recent conflict, they remained suspiciously absent during the 78-day aerial bombardment of Serbia and Kosovo.
What makes this even more outrageous, is that there were claims...and even evidence, that the US/NATO were intentionally violating the Geneva Conventions. From the deliberate targeting of SerbTV, to the bridge that the civilian commuter train #393 traveled, to electrical grids and public utilities...Wesley Clark violated some of the basic rules of Geneva. Hell, there was even a foreign indicted issued against Clark that listed him as a war criminal, yet you wouldn't know that from our media's coverage.
From Somalia to Kosovo to Iraq to Afghanistan and Sudan, the media NEVER stepped foot in these nations to document the death and destruction that Clinton's agressions may have caused. Even the destruction of the Al-Shifa pharmacuetical plant in Sudan was treated as a benign incident...with media labeling it an "aspirin factory."
This was much more than an aspirin factory, as this plant produced about 50% of the medicines this country needed to fight tuberculosis and Malaria. In fact, one published report I read from years ago claims that as many as 10,000 people may have died as a result of not having access to these medicines. I can guarantee that if this was a Bush attack, we would've heard about these deaths...not to mention the lawsuit that followed and the multi-million dollar payout that our government agreed to.
In what may be an even more troubling development, a report indicates that the leading Rumsfeld critic may have inadvertently played a role in tipping off Osama bin Laden to an impending U.S. cruise missile attack two years before the Cole episode.Two days after President Clinton ordered the attack on bin Laden's encampment in Khost Afghanistan, the Associated Press reported:
"Kuwait's Al-Watan newspaper, quoting unidentified sources in London today, reported that Pakistan leaked to bin Laden news about an impending U.S. strike. The sources said the leak was aimed at limiting casualties, so that bin Laden would have less justification for a counterattack.
"A Pakistani government source, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that Gen. Anthony Zinni, commander of the U.S. Central Command, was in Peshawar the day before the attack to meet with Pakistani officials.
"Other Pakistani sources said Zinni came with a team of U.S. intelligence experts whose task was to pinpoint the camps and determine bin Laden's exact whereabouts."
Gen. Anthony Zinni: USS Cole Blunder Is My Fault [Rumsfeld Critic a Clinton-Hack ]
NewsMax ^ | 4/18/2006 | Carl Limbacher
Apparently, Zinni was clinton's useful idiot even back then.
I am not that familiar with his career or role prior to becoming Commander at CentCom, which was in 1997. But I did learn from a casual Google search from Larry Chin (whot I conclude is a Communist Wacko from the Marxist Fever Swamp), his fellow inmate in the Swamp, Noam Chomsky claims in his book The New Military Humanism that at the time Marine Lt.General Anthony Zinni was in charge of the overall mission, as reported in this snip:
"Hundreds, perhaps thousands, of Somalis were killed in the course of US incursions that took place over three months. In his book The New Military Humanism, Noam Chomsky cites other under-reported facts. "In October 1993, criminal incompetence by the US military led to the slaughter of 1,000 Somalis by American firepower." Chomsky writes. "The official estimate was 6-10,000 Somali casualties in the summer of 1993 alone, two-thirds women and children. Marine Lt. Gen. Anthony Zinni, who commanded the operation, informed the press that 'I'm not counting bodies . . . I'm not interested.'
I don't accept any of judgmental condemnations fuming out of the mouths of radical cretins like Chomsky, but on his reporting who was in charge...he likely didn't have any reason to lie about that.
I don't know Zinni's role in calling off the whole operation, but the article claims Clinton made the decision:
After 18 US Special Forces soldiers were killed in the final Mogadishu firefight, which included the downing of a US helicopter, television screens filled with the scene of a dead US soldier being dragged through the streets by jubilant Somalis. Clinton immediately called off the operation. US forces left Somalia in disgrace
Senate Armed (vice House) Services
I know that, but what has this got to do with Rummie outside that???????
I have read through it to the end...but nowhere did I see Zinni or any of the Senators on the Committee allude to the explicit warnings of Able Danger. I did see an occasional oblique reference to unsourced or unnamed 'concerns' and 'factors' and 'situations' resulting in ships detouring their in-port refueling in the region. They had 27 ships refuel at Yemen prior to the Cole attack.
Did you note that Zinni complained about the high cost of having to institute 'adequate' force protection measures because he wasn't "offered" oilers for the 23 ships tasked to his Command?
If the number of oilers we cut back to was based on a monetary concern...it seems to me that it was a mistaken calculus...ingoring the increased force protection financial costs. Which is the greater?
And in view of the hazards, and with the comparatively perfect security of at-sea refueling...a weighting of the cost differential in the oilers favor seems crucial. Obviously if you are in a hazardous area...no amount of 'protections' will necessarily be sufficient...as we learned. Suffering a lot more than operations costs. Casualties. A ship wrecked so badly it took 3 years to return her to service. And we were just fortunate that she wasn't sunk outright.
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.
