Ex-General: Iraq a 'Nightmare' for US

xd9fan

New member
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.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20071013/D8S83AD80.html
 
Interesting how all these retired generals chose to keep quiet until after they were out of the military to speak out. I know they were just protecting their pensions, but where's the integrity? They should have resigned in protest if they thought the war was so ill-advised or was being so badly mismanaged.

IMO, the new improved policy is too late at this point. Too bad Bush and his crew didn't bother with any planning on what to do with Iraq once Sadaam was deposed.
 
You forgot to bold the important part


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.
 
Interesting how all these retired generals chose to keep quiet until after they were out of the military to speak out.
Them's the rules. The integrity is in the fact that many of them choose to end their careers and blow the whistle instead of continuing their careers and keeping silent. Not that anyone really listens.

You forgot to bold the important part
Attacking the troops: It's not just for liberals anymore.
 
What do you expect him to say.That Patraeus is doing a better job and he was too dumb to figure out a working stategy?
 
Them's the rules. The integrity is in the fact that many of them choose to end their careers and blow the whistle instead of continuing their careers and keeping silent. Not that anyone really listens.

Thats funny. I always thought integrity was to show respect and deference to the commander in chief and the generals in command during war time. Plenty of generals have disagreed about strategy. For some reason, however, its become fashionable to ignore over 200 years of precedent, and openly bash the military. If thats integrity I don't want any part of it.


Attacking the troops: It's not just for liberals anymore.

So lets ignore the fact that he was passed over and almost demoted for his imcompetence. It doesn't matter that it looks like he has a huge chip on his shoulder. Lets also ignore that the last time he was in Iraq was 2004.

I'm starting to see why you think Paul can win.
 
Are there any ex-Generals out there who have come out saying we have done a good job in Iraq and that things are going well?

Only ex-Generals count. The ones still in the military can't say what they really feel.
 
yep. The well-poisoning is in full-swing. :rolleyes:

Do you have anything to contradict what the man is saying? 'Cuz it seems to me that he knows a lot more about this than you.
 
Do you have anything to contradict what the man is saying? 'Cuz it seems to me that he knows a lot more about this than you.

Sure. Talk to my man Petraeus. I bet he knows alot more about it than this guy seeing as he hasnt been "in country" in 3 years.
 
I agree with Marko. Ex-generals have consistently spoken out about the problems in Iraq, and the usual Republican lap dogs have consistently attempted to discredit them.
 
The ex-generals have one thing in common.They all failed.Whatever you think of the possilbility of the task, any admission of responsibility for the failure is aganst most egocentric's nature.
 
The ex-generals have one thing in common.They all failed.

If the policy was a failure from the start who is responsible. We should never
send troops in as a police force for another government, if attack strike back
with extreme force and get out, we never seem to learn that simple rule.
 
And in a few years, when Petraeus gives his candid opinion on Iraq, you'll find a reason to dismiss that one, too.

He already gave his opinion. And as former military I thought you would have understood the concept of keeping things "in house". I guess the kaiser does things differently over there.
 
They have something else in common too: They're free to say what they really think.

Ok. So the minute someone says something we should blatantly accept it as fact.

People love to hold up these media darling generals (most of whom have become "consultants" for one outlet or another) as example of why this war is a nightmare.

Lets put our thinking caps on for a minute. Right now there are between 800-900 active duty generals/admirals serving in the armed forces. I don't know how many retired generals there are, but I think its a safe bet to say that they number in the hundreds.

So what we have are around 20 people out of 900 active duty and hundreds more retired that think this war is a clusterflop. Well thats fine, however I dont usually proclaim things as true based on less than 1% of the evidence.

Add to that many of these people were scrubbed for promotion, or reprimanded, or life long democrats, and it looks like you've got a bunch of axe grinders as opposed to people who want whats best for the country.


Of course if you guys want to just take what they say thats fine too. Its more fun to scream "the war is lost" and fall on you sword in a grotesque manner.
 
Today the military commanders in Iraq said that they feel they have made significant enough progress to declare victory against Al Qaeda.Maybe these new commanders have a little more talent than the ones saying the mission was impossible.
 
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.

But Sanchez doesn't acknowledge that senior military officers and/or government officials could have had the same lack of foresight. Hindsight is 20/20.

Mistakes made? Lack of planning? Lack of foresight to create a political framework to rebuild the country? Yup. I'd say all of those happened.

But even if there was a plan to rebuild the political infrastructure of the country, I'm sure we'd be hearing the same criticisms we did after WW-II when many Nazis were placed in administrative posts while trying to create some semblance of order out of the chaos that was Germany.

I'd like to know if Sanchez told this superiors what he thought was needed in Iraq or what complaints he filed that the State Dept wasn't getting the job done.
 
We can debate all day but simply this war was a mistake from the beginning,
I served in Vietnam we made the same mistakes then and still we fail to learn.

Officers serve to the bidding of government and I feel most try to carry out
orders given but again if the policy is a failed policy from the start how do
you win.


Use the military as it was intend to protect the USA not as a police unit
of other governments or the wealthy. I seen great people in the military
but in my opinion their hands are tied by Washington.
 
Back
Top