Will the Board Bushies ever admit Iraq is a mess?

LadyEagle · Sep 19, 2004

Republican and Democratic senators urged the Bush administration on Sunday to face the reality of the situation in Iraq and change its policies. A major problem, said leaders of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on CBS'"Face the Nation," was incompetence by the administration in reconstructing the country's shattered infrastructure.

"The fact is a crisp, sharp analysis of our policies is required. We didn't do that in Vietnam, and we saw 11 years of casualties mount to the point where we finally lost," said Sen. Chuck Hagel, a Vietnam War veteran who is co-chairman of President Bush's re-election committee in Nebraska.
Click to expand...

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040919/D856VE883.html

Good Grief! If Bush would have only left this up to the Generals instead of goofy MBAs trying to plan wars! No wonder Tommy Franks retired.

Joseph_Botwinick · Sep 19, 2004

1. All wars are a mess. But, most of them are very necessary, as is this one.

2. Pick up a copy of General Tommy Franks new book "American Soldier" and I think you will find that he has a different perspective of how the war has and is being run than you do. He has, BTW, publicly endorsed President Bush this year.

Joseph Botwinick

LadyEagle · Sep 19, 2004

Have you read his book, Joseph?

The Taliban al Qaeda are bragging they have retaken Southern Afghanistan.

Of course, at the time, I even posted on this board that I thought the war in Afghanistan was going wrong. General Franks was in charge of that, too. He failed to secure the border between Afghanistan and Iran and made it easy for the enemy to slide.

Galatian even chided me on that one, if I remember. But it looks like I was correct after all. Guess it must be those hundreds of old black and white WW2 movies I watched with my dad when I was a kid. And my mastery at the game of chess. You have to second guess your opponent and make a plan for every possible move they might do. Apparently that wasn't done. Either in Afghanistan or Iraq.

Joseph_Botwinick · Sep 19, 2004

I have read part of it in the bookstore, mainly where he discusses the conference he had with the President concerning the war in Iraq. It was very interesting. I am on the waiting list to check it out from the library currently. Here are some interesting quotes I found on Newsmax directly from General Franks himself:

President Bush: “As I look at President Bush, I think he will ultimately be judged as a man of extremely high character. A very thoughtful man, not having been appraised properly by those who would say he’s not very smart. I find the contrary. I think he’s very, very bright. And I suspect that he’ll be judged as a man who led this country through a crease in history effectively. Probably we’ll think of him in years to come as an American hero.”

On the motivation for the Iraq war: Contrary to claims that top Pentagon brass opposed the invasion of Iraq, Franks said he wholeheartedly agreed with the president’s decision to invade Iraq and oust Saddam Hussein.

“I, for one, begin with intent. ... There is no question that Saddam Hussein had intent to do harm to the Western alliance and to the United States of America. That intent is confirmed in a great many of his speeches, his commentary, the words that have come out of the Iraqi regime over the last dozen or so years. So we have intent.

“If we know for sure ... that a regime has intent to do harm to this country, and if we have something beyond a reasonable doubt that this particular regime may have the wherewithal with which to execute the intent, what are our actions and orders as leaders in this country?”
Click to expand...

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/11/20/185048.shtml

We are not going to win every battle. But, we can and will win the war. We must.

Joseph Botwinick

Joseph_Botwinick · Sep 19, 2004

Originally posted by LadyEagle:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
Republican and Democratic senators urged the Bush administration on Sunday to face the reality of the situation in Iraq and change its policies. A major problem, said leaders of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on CBS'"Face the Nation," was incompetence by the administration in reconstructing the country's shattered infrastructure.

"The fact is a crisp, sharp analysis of our policies is required. We didn't do that in Vietnam, and we saw 11 years of casualties mount to the point where we finally lost," said Sen. Chuck Hagel, a Vietnam War veteran who is co-chairman of President Bush's re-election committee in Nebraska.
Click to expand...

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040919/D856VE883.html

Good Grief! If Bush would have only left this up to the Generals instead of goofy MBAs trying to plan wars! No wonder Tommy Franks retired. </font>[/QUOTE]Which generals should he have left this up to? It would seem that General Franks, the top guy who was in the country, agreed with Bush's decisions.

Joseph Botwinick

LadyEagle · Sep 19, 2004

Well, Joseph. We won't. There will be civil war in Iraq and our troops will be caught in the middle as I have been saying all along.

We do win the battles. But we will not win the war. The reason is because there has been and continues to be too much politicking going on just like in Vietnam.

I would like to know in what ways other than possible intelligence gathering, the war in Afghanistan or Iraq has profitted the American people with the exception of the very rich.

Certain people in this administration have made money off of this war. A person of moral character would believe that policy makers of any country who sends the sons and daughters of others to be maimed and die, while profitting from the act of war on another nation, would be a conflict of interest or a betrayal of the public trust. At the very least.

But if one can promote enough justification for the Body Politic to support one's actions, that makes it okay. One way to promote justification is to make the threat seem more ominous than it really is, or, to create a diversion from what one is really up to.

Joseph_Botwinick · Sep 19, 2004

So, which generals were you referring to, LE? You know, the ones Bush should have listened to, besides Franks? The only similarity I can find in this war and Vietnam is the predictable belly-aching and seditious (borderline treasonous) speech that has come from the liberal anti-war crowd.

Joseph Botwinick

LadyEagle · Sep 19, 2004

Joseph, I seem to remember there was a big to-do between the Generals and Rumsfeld about the number of "boots on the ground" needed to assure complete victory. Even all the talk shows with retired military officers were talking about the numbers. There weren't enough. The estimates were reduced by the civilian, Donald Rumsfeld.

And especially my #1 Military hero, the Hack, harped on it. The Hack got so disgusted with the military leadership (including the Commander in Chief), and their strategies, he even stopped appearing on cable shows.

Here is his web site: http://www.hackworth.com

Here's a snip from a Conservative website:

History suggests that one precondition for defeating guerrillas is overwhelming numerical superiority, with a ratio of 10:1 traditionally cited as the minimum requirement. Even counting the fledgling Iraqi army, allied contingents (some of dubious quality), and the modern-day mercenaries known as private contractors, counterinsurgent forces available in Iraq today fall well short of that 10:1 standard.

Numbers alone cannot guarantee victory. But without enough boots on the ground, it becomes impossible to provide security. Absent security, it becomes impossible to gain the trust and confidence of the people, as the newly installed Iraqi government desperately needs to do.

How many U.S. troops do we actually need to pacify Iraq, a landmass the size of California, with long, open borders and an increasingly alienated population of 25 million? A quarter of a million soldiers—almost twice the number currently deployed—would not be too many.

Bush and Rumsfeld have repeatedly vowed to provide their commanders with whatever they need to accomplish their mission. For public consumption at least, U.S. generals have said that troop strength in Iraq is adequate. But the new, higher estimate of the enemy’s forces has made that position untenable.

Either the Bush administration needs to get serious about winning the war that it so recklessly sought in Iraq, or it needs to cut its losses. To persist in the present course is merely to perpetuate the existing stalemate—with good men and women getting killed and maimed, tens of billions of dollars being expended, and the United States exhausting its stores of goodwill—all to no purpose.

Getting serious means mobilizing the country for an expanded military commitment. Mobilization necessarily entails changes in domestic priorities. It also implies an urgent, costly, and politically sensitive expansion of the U.S. Army, the service bearing the greatest burden for the war’s conduct.

Cutting our losses means promptly beginning the process of disengagement. That implies bringing the troops home, leaving it to the now-liberated Iraqis to sort out their future, and mending the diplomatic fences so recklessly torn down in the administration’s rush to war.

The issue is a political one. But military realities rather than ideological fantasies or electoral calculations deserve pride of place in considering the alternatives.
Click to expand...

http://www.amconmag.com/2004_08_30/article1.html

Joseph_Botwinick · Sep 19, 2004

Here is what General Tommy Franks, who was in Iraq and had a firsthand leadership perspective of what was going on in Iraq had to say about the number of troops issue:

Franks: No Extra Troops Needed in Iraq

LadyEagle · Sep 19, 2004

Looks like he was wrong.

Pennsylvania Jim · Sep 19, 2004

No number of troops can force order and "democracy" upon a nation made up of three large, non-Christian groups who hate each other and are glad to die for their respective causes.

Joseph_Botwinick · Sep 19, 2004

Originally posted by LadyEagle:
Looks like he was wrong.
Click to expand...

Was he wrong because Hack says so or because you say so? Or, is it possible that Hack, as great a military hero as he probably was, doesn't have a clue what he is talking about because he is not there and doesn't know what is really going on? I don't know. I think General Franks probably has more credibility than some guy on the tv and radio and probably has a better handle on the situation.

Joseph Botwinick

Pennsylvania Jim · Sep 19, 2004

Hack must be wrong...after all, those in charge have everything about wrapped up.

poncho · Sep 20, 2004

We'll be in Iran and Syria before long and Iraq will be just another small matter. Hey! I wonder if Haliburton is hiring? I's think there would be lots of glass repair work to be done over there by now.

Is it fair to outsource yourself to another country?

Joseph_Botwinick · Sep 20, 2004

Do you think this is the only work Haliburton has ever done after a war? There is a reason they are there that has nothing to do with Cheney or some grand conspiracy.

Joseph Botwinick

Terry_Herrington · Sep 20, 2004

Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
Do you think this is the only work Haliburton has ever done after a war? There is a reason they are there that has nothing to do with Cheney or some grand conspiracy.

Joseph Botwinick
Click to expand...

Yea, right.

Pennsylvania Jim · Sep 20, 2004

Sure, all the connections are simply coincidinces.

SpiritualMadMan · Sep 20, 2004

As Joeseph says all wars are a mess...

Given the political climate of this nation and the large numbers of 'Armchair' generals...

What we have is a mess...

But, it is **FAR** less of a mess than the Liberal Pro-Communist News Media is making it out to be...

I'd rather have what we now have than have saddam still in power using the billions of dollars from the Oil for Food Program to fund Al Queda actively...

Most sources close to the scandal investigation are saying that it is left over Oil for Food money that is funding the insurgency...

And, we 'dare' wnder why France, Germany, and Russia didn't want us to go into Iraq??? They made over 10.1 Billion dollars!

And, kerry still thinks the UN is the US's friend and it's true value is yet to be relaized?????

Go on Don Quixote... Have your joust...

Pennsylvania Jim · Sep 20, 2004

Saddam Hussein did not, as far as I have seen, fund Al Quaeda. It would be illogical for him to do so, since they hated him and would have used the money to attampt to kill him or destroy his regime.

Pennsylvania Jim · Sep 20, 2004

To answer the original question of the post:

"Will the Board Bushies ever admit Iraq is a mess?"

Yes, around next February, if Kerry is elected.

Will the Board Bushies ever admit Iraq is a mess?

LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

Joseph_Botwinick <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

Joseph_Botwinick <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

Joseph_Botwinick <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

Joseph_Botwinick <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

Joseph_Botwinick <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

Pennsylvania Jim New Member

Joseph_Botwinick <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

Pennsylvania Jim New Member

poncho Well-Known Member

Joseph_Botwinick <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

Terry_Herrington New Member

Pennsylvania Jim New Member

SpiritualMadMan New Member

Pennsylvania Jim New Member

Pennsylvania Jim New Member

Useful Searches

Will the Board Bushies ever admit Iraq is a mess?

LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

Joseph_Botwinick <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

Joseph_Botwinick <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

Joseph_Botwinick <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

Joseph_Botwinick <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

Joseph_Botwinick <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

Pennsylvania Jim New Member

Joseph_Botwinick <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

Pennsylvania Jim New Member

poncho Well-Known Member

Joseph_Botwinick <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

Terry_Herrington New Member

Pennsylvania Jim New Member

SpiritualMadMan New Member

Pennsylvania Jim New Member

Pennsylvania Jim New Member