For Vietnam Vet Anthony Zinni, Another War on Shaky Territory -NYT

[Rose Siding]

snip>


"Obviously there are differences" between Vietnam and Iraq, he says. "Every situation is unique." But in his bones, he feels the same chill. "It feels the same. I hear the same things -- about not telling the good news, about cooking up a rationale for getting into the war." He sees both conflicts as beginning with deception by the U.S. government, drawing a parallel between how the Johnson administration handled the beginning of the Vietnam War and how the Bush administration touted the threat presented by Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. "I think the American people were conned into this," he says. Referring to the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident, in which the Johnson administration claimed that U.S. Navy ships had been subjected to an unprovoked attack by North Vietnam, he says, "The Gulf of Tonkin and the case for WMD and terrorism is synonymous in my mind."

Likewise, he says, the goal of transforming the Middle East by imposing democracy by force reminds him of the "domino theory" in the 1960s that the United States had to win in Vietnam to prevent the rest of Southeast Asia from falling into communist hands.

And that brings him back to Wolfowitz and his neoconservative allies as the root of the problem. "I don't know where the neocons came from -- that wasn't the platform they ran on," he says. "Somehow, the neocons captured the president. They captured the vice president."

He is especially irked that, as he sees it, no senior officials have taken responsibility for their incorrect assessment of the threat posed by Iraq. "What I don't understand is that the bill of goods the neocons sold him has been proven false, yet heads haven't rolled," he says. "Where is the accountability? I think some fairly senior people at the Pentagon ought to go." Who? "That's up to the president."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A22922-2003Dec22?language=printer

...hard to choose the snips- the whole, long article is good. He goes after Cheney and Congress too.

[Ilsa]

1. And in the end...

Quote from the end of the article:
snip

Even home in Williamsburg, he has been surprised at the reaction. "I mean, I live in a very conservative Republican community, and people were saying, 'You're right.' "

But Zinni vows that he has learned a lesson. Reminded that he endorsed Bush in 2000, he says, "I'm not going to do anything political again -- ever. I made that mistake one time."
snip

I think it's chickenshit that he doesn't have the nerve to admit he's wrong and stand up for a candidate that is ready to end this bogus war. He screwed up and he isn't willing to try and correct it.

[NJCher]

3. I didn't take it that way

I took it that he won't endorse a presidential candidate again.

Cher

[TacticalPeek]

4. Zinni opposed the Iraq debacle eloquently going in.

No mistake there.

As for endorsing Shrub, you quote him saying "I made that mistake one time", so how can you claim "he doesn't have the nerve to admit he's wrong"? A review of his speeches, etc. over the last year, would seem to indicate that nerve is not something of which he is short.

:shrug:

[tabasco]

2. I'm gaining respect for Zinni.

He has realized the destructive nature of the Bush corporate cabal. I'm hoping many more Americans will have the moral courage to admit they were wrong for voting for Bush simply because he had an "R" next to his name.

[SharonAnn]

5. I've always had respect for him. he was very effective in

trying to work out the issues in the Israel-Palestine conflicts. Not his fault that he didn't succeed.

I admire military people who understand the broad range of issues in foreign policy and actively work to try to prevent war.

They are the real deal!

[VolcanoJen]

6. Kicking for excellence

:dem:

Fantastic article.

[NIGHT TRIPPER]

7. GREAT Article !!

I'll email this one to my republican brother !
He still believes that story that Saddam was like Hitler and that "we had ta go in."..and occupation is a GOOD thing !
I keep showing him articles like this, one day before yesterday from the Boston Globe and he still has his blinders on.

Question:
So what do the diehard "fans" need to be shown before they come around?
So many outright LIES exposed -absolute proof of misleading deception and secret self serving motives by this administration !

Is it that no one wants to admit they were duped and suckered by the lies?
all the sources, even Generals saying this is WRONG!
What does it take for them to realize?

[leftchick]

10. my mother is the same way....

I could show her this but she would not read it because it is from a librul source. All of the media is librul except faux news which is fair and balanced. You get the picture. I had a terrible argument with her a month ago when I found out my cousin is going back to Iraq. He is in the guard, has a wife and 3 children. He also had a career as a sheriff deputy. I thought for sure that would shake my mother into reality but alas, she is proud he is going to "protect our freedoms"....it is hopeless.... :cry:

[hellhathnofury]

8. Future Considerations

I really like Zinni, he should probably be our man in Baghdad if we win in 04.

Great Article, Great Man

[saigon68]

9. Very Good Article

A must read.

[leftchick]

11. here is a great part.....

<He was alarmed that day to hear Cheney make the argument for attacking Iraq on grounds that Zinni found questionable at best:

"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction," Cheney said. "There is no doubt that he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us."

Cheney's certitude bewildered Zinni. As chief of the Central Command, Zinni had been immersed in U.S. intelligence about Iraq. He was all too familiar with the intelligence analysts' doubts about Iraq's programs to acquire weapons of mass destruction, or WMD. "In my time at Centcom, I watched the intelligence, and never -- not once -- did it say, 'He has WMD.' "

Though retired for nearly two years, Zinni says, he remained current on the intelligence through his consulting with the CIA and the military. "I did consulting work for the agency, right up to the beginning of the war. I never saw anything. I'd say to analysts, 'Where's the threat?' " Their response, he recalls, was, "Silence."

Zinni's concern deepened as Cheney pressed on that day at the Opryland Hotel. "Time is not on our side," the vice president said. "The risks of inaction are far greater than the risks of action."

Zinni's conclusion as he slowly walked off the stage that day was that the Bush administration was determined to go to war. A moment later, he had another, equally chilling thought: "These guys don't understand what they are getting into." >

[teryang]

12. Where does the buck stop?

"The more I saw, the more I thought that this was the product of the neocons who didn't understand the region and were going to create havoc there. These were dilettantes from Washington think tanks who never had an idea that worked on the ground."

<"I don't know where the neocons came from -- that wasn't the platform they ran on," he says. "Somehow, the neocons captured the president. They captured the vice president." >

Why haven't heads rolled? Because this was the plan with all its deception and propaganda from the beginning. Chechny and Bushevik aren't being misled or "captured." They planned this with their energy and defense contractor friends. Of course it wasn't discussed with the Pentagon professional military leadership. They had to get an Air Force General to honcho the Pentagon during a ground war and find an Army Chief in the form of a retired special forces General because no Active Army General would work directly for them.

The lament that the "leader" was captured or mislead by others is a classic lament in totalitarian dictatorships. If the leader only knew, he certainly wouldn't follow such destructive, irrational and apparently aimless policies. Yes, but the leader did know, he did lie, and he did it intentionally as a part of plan to save his shaky and illegitimate rule. The plan is destruction and chaos for its own political sake. It is we who are "captured." The destructiveness and irrationality of this regimes policies are meant to reduce the masses at home and abroad, including the educated social leaders, to fear, instability and impotence.

[NJCher]

15. good points about totalitarianism, teryang

I watch in astonishment as everyone tries to excuse this fool. And it's happened time after time. Look at Tricky Dick when he went down. He didn't know a thing, either. Nor did Reagan.


Cher

[teryang]

16. Not an original notion

It is explained at length in Hannah Arendt's Origins of Totalitarianism. Thanks for the reinforcement.

[LizW]

13. Zinni knew exactly what a quagmire Iraq could be

and he spoke at length about what it would take to win a war there. He gave a point-by-point description of what it would take. It is startling to read it now and to see how Bushco failed on every point to plan for the post war period.

I don't blame him for being irked now. He told them and they didn't listen.

[PsN2Wind]

14. I e-mailed the article

to a hardcore right-wing friend that had just sent me the "powerful letter" from Cdr. H. McWhorter. I included a short message that stated that this was a "powerful article" from someone who was more in the loop, and current on what was taking place than a retired WWII Navy fighter ace. I'll save the article as rebuttal to these types of people and letters that try to rationalize what we are doing in Iraq.
Hope many of you do the same.

[0007]

17. God, I love this guy

Wish he'd run for president.