Root Causes of Haditha

Salt Lake City Times ^ | June 9, 2006 | Maj. Gen. (Ret.) John Batiste

[jazusamo]

It is a sad day when Generals retire and take cheap shots at their bosses. If they felt that strongly they should have made it known while on active duty and resigned in protest. They have no honor.

[DoughtyOne]

The term 'root causes of Haditha', presumes that there was a crime committed. If there wasn't, then the root cause of this incident in Haditha is no different than the root cause for any action in the theater of war.

[ctdonath2]

There cannot be a direct link between two things when one never happened.
There cannot be a root cause of something that isn't.

[Darkwolf377]

We continue to bleed our national treasure in blood and dollars.

Liberals love this line. I've never seen so many libs concerned about high government spending.

[SevenMinusOne]

You cannot do this with precision bombs from 30,000 feet. This is tough, dangerous, and very personal work. Numbers count.

Nor have we for one minute in this WOT/Iraq tried to accomplish anything via the above manner -

Maj. Gen. (Ret. -thankfully!) John Batiste has had his poor little (clearly) fragile ego hurt and has completely dishonored himself over the past year or so -

The reality is in any conflict it is easy to second guess decisions that have been made - Even in the best of victories there are likely a number of things one would do different if given the chance (espeically knowing everything they know after the fact).

But the true reality remains SecDef Rumsfeld as led in taking the fight to our enemies. He has supported our fighting men and women 100% and that he has ruffled a few feathers (mainly in the old Big Green) so be it!

Gen. Batiste is completely off base and we are better off with him being (Ret) without question! (and sadly and apparently angrily Gen Batiste knows this as well).

[E. Pluribus Unum]

It is extremely impolite to omit the mandatory "Barf Alert" for these types of posts.

[Williams]

Hardly an intelligent article. Batiste thinks the war would be over if only someone had followed his advice years ago. So then every tiny negative event is ipso facto blamed on the supposed bad decisions of 2003. But as noted above, batiste doesn't write an article attributing any good development to Rumsfeld, and obviously there have been good developments.

One imagines that if the Marines are cleared over Haditha, Batiste will write an article stating Rumsfeld is NOT responsible.

[Darkwolf377]

There is a direct link between the alleged atrocities

How can you reveal the root cause of something you haven't even established as fact?

[johnny7]

The guys a puke... I'd like to know what he's getting out of this.

[Dilbert56]

Someone frag this F%^&*er.

[alloysteel]

How does what Donald Rumsfeld says and acts upon in the Pentagon translate into what is portrayed as a massacre far away in Iraq? So nearly as can be determined, Secretary Rumsfeld greatly deplores this manner of carrying out missions in the field.

And are the facts of what happened in Haditha even now known, or is this mere speculation and wishful thinking on the part of media whores with overactive imaginations?

So far as may be discerned from what has been made available so far, there may be multiple interpretations of the course of events. One entirely plausible explanation may be that the Marines involved were returning fire at snipers, when a number of innocent Iraqi women and children were thrust forward as human shields, and the snipers ducked away. Sure it doesn't look good, but in that case, the civilian casualties are collateral damage, and not victims of some zombie squad gone mad in the fog of war.

This is NOT My Lai.

[Parmy]

Sorry!!!!! Mea Culpa!

[Richard Axtell]

"The secretary of defense's decision to stand down the Iraqi military resulted in uncontrollable chaos and the dismantling of the extensive Iraqi security force infrastructure that we are still working to rebuild today. This decision gave the insurgency an unlimited supply of manpower, weapons and ammunition."

This has never been a valid criticism. This "force structure" happens to be the same one that Saddam used to annihilate Shiite and Kurdish resistance at the end of the first Gulf war. Why would retaining the un-retainable be a good idea? Better reconstruct a loyal Iraqi military than simply start paying the tools of genocide with American dollars, I say. Too often, criticisms of Rumsfeld are of events or situations either no one could foresee or control, regardless of their hindsight. This view is reinforced by the lack of criticism now of current policies, that are working by the way, and the fact that NONE of the dissident generals ever suggested the mix of stratagems and tactics that is now proving to work. No one is clairvoyant here, least of all these retired, tired generals.

[Bahbah]

Here is their attempt to keep the non-atrocity at Haditha in the news and to continue the drumbeat for Rummy's head. They really have no shame and there are no limits to what they will do.

[vpintheak]

How stupid and idiotic are these people? It is exasperating!

[D-Chivas]

I'd like to backhand this chump.

Me, too. Although blacklisting Klein Steel Services also helps.

[F-117A]

I am a two-time combat veteran in Iraq with many years of experience in peace enforcement operations in Bosnia and Kosovo.

So, General, why didn't you do anything to stop the Albanian terrorists?

[F-117A]

"Continuing his dilatory tactics, McClellan resorted to constant demands for more men and called for massive reequipping and fresh mounts for his cavalry."

My Hero...

--- Maj. Gen. John Batiste

[Jonah Johansen]

Wall Street Journal did an in depth article on him. It was done by the news side of the WSJ which is more liberal than the editorial page. The intention and tone of the article was mildly supportive of the general, but if you read carefully his complaint and his beef with Rumsfield it raised more question about his judgment than Rumsfield's.

The revealing incident was when Rumsfield paid a visit to Iraq to meet with him and the other generals. According to Batiste there were all these terrible problems he had all these critical concerns; yet when asked in front of others how things were going and if he needed anything he said everything was fine. When invited to speak privately with Rumsfield and air any concerns, he turned down the opportunity. His very week excuse was; he did not want to appear to be undermining the general in command and he did not think Rumsfield would listen to his complaints.
After reading carefully the interview you really suspect his motivations his judgment or both. We are supposed to believe a senior commander in Iraq believed hundreds of soldiers were dying and we were losing the war but he did not feel he could talk to Rumsfield or the President about it, so he quit the service.

The more you listen to Generals Clark, Zinni and Batisti the more doubt are raised about them than the people they are attacking.

[Reaganesque]

I sent this to the Times:

The author levels charges of war atrocities against the Marines, a very serious charge. Since it is such a serious charge, wouldn’t it be prudent and indeed the just thing to do to wait until we have all the facts about what happened before making such damning assumptions? What ever happened to “innocent until proven guilty?” Shouldn’t we wait until a full investigation (which is underway) is completed before making such charges? And yet, the author assumes the guilt of the Marines in question and uses that assumption to condemn the Secretary of Defense and the war in general. He proceeds to parrot the Left’s self-serving accusations of incompetence, bad planning and lies; all based on the assumption of guilt of the Haditha Marines.

But then, this really isn’t about war atrocities, is it? No, this is about scoring political points. If there are political points to be scored against the real enemy (President Bush), what do the lives and reputations of a few Marines matter, right? The important thing is: getting Democrats elected. The Left can claim all they want that they “support the troops” but, when the Left is so eager to jump on allegations of wrong doing without knowing what really happened, their claims ring very hollow.