WP: Dissension Grows In Senior Ranks On War Strategy

[kskiska]

U.S. May Be Winning Battles in Iraq, Losing the War, Some Officers Say

Sunday, May 9, 2004; Page A01

Deep divisions are emerging at the top of the U.S. military over the course of the occupation of Iraq, with some senior officers beginning to say that the United States faces the prospect of casualties for years without achieving its goal of establishing a free and democratic Iraq.

Their major worry is that the United States is prevailing militarily but failing to win the support of the Iraqi people. That view is far from universal, but it is spreading, and being voiced publicly for the first time.

Army Maj. Gen. Charles H. Swannack Jr., the commander of the 82nd Airborne Division, who spent much of the year in western Iraq, said he believes that at the tactical level at which fighting occurs, the U.S. military is still winning. But when asked whether he believes the United States is losing, he said, "I think strategically, we are."

Army Col. Paul Hughes, who last year was the first director of strategic planning for the U.S. occupation authority in Baghdad, said he agrees with that view and noted that a pattern of winning battles while losing a war characterized the U.S. failure in Vietnam. "Unless we ensure that we have coherency in our policy, we will lose strategically," he said in an interview Friday.

"I lost my brother in Vietnam," added Hughes, a veteran Army strategist who is involved in formulating Iraq policy. "I promised myself, when I came on active duty, that I would do everything in my power to prevent that from happening again. Here I am, 30 years later, thinking we will win every fight and lose the war, because we don't understand the war we're in."

more…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A11227-2004May8.html

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

1. Rumsfeld has been pretty controversial from the start.

...the Pentagon dislike of Rumsfeld actually predates Iraq.

[saigon68]

51. PENTAGON CRIMINALS IN UNIFORM

Meyers is working overtime to keep the lid on this. According to MSNBC the "PICTURES
AREN'T EVEN IN DC YET"

What a Freaking LIE. They could send a Giga bite of data in 2 seconds for heaven sakes ---do
they believe we are that STOOPID ??

NeoCon Fucking liars posing as Generals



Next week or the week after next the NEOCON Generals plan to let a few select congressMEN
see them..

Then after the congressMEN go on TV with their usual outrage statements THE PENTAGON
will decide what to do next.

I hope the DINOS and others keep the heat on these CRIMINALS IN UNIFORM

[markses]

2. Um, didn't the SecDef PURGE the military of naysayers in early 2003?

Can another purge be far behind?

Leaks leaks leaks!

Ooooo, they must make poor little Bushie soooooo mad!

[grytpype]

3. Oh, my God.

The Army is rebelling against the Administration.

This is big

[dusty64]

59. Just wait till our

regime tries desperately to start a new front in their corporate "holy" war in Iran or Syria. This ought to get real scary and interesting.

[KissMyAsscroft]

4. BWAHAHAH!!! What a riot...!!

"prospect of casualties for years without achieving its goal of establishing a free and democratic Iraq. "


>>>HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Man, that is TOO funny. Whoever is saying this must REALLY be out of the loop! LOL!

[truthisfreedom]

5. ok, i guess that means bush will have to break out the "strategic" weapons

now what are those again? ICBMs?

[bemildred]

6. Tactical "victory" is meaningless if your operational goals

are stupid. Tactical warfare is supposed to serve strategic
goals, not vice versa. What they mean by saying that we are
"winning tactically" is that in every battle our superior firepower
results in more dead Iraqis than dead US soldiers. They never "took"
Faloojah, even though they had kill ratios around 5 or 10 to 1 (from
what we know now.) This is just naive. Meanwhile our logistical and
strategic situation has been degrading for a year now.

[annagull]

7. Check out "Pollyanna" Wolfowitz

"There's no question that we're facing some difficulties," Wolfowitz said. "I don't mean to sound Pollyannaish -- we all know that we're facing a tough problem."

Pollyannaish? Like when you said we would be greeted as "liberators"? Like when you said the "oil will pay for the war"?
Wolfowitz, you are the epitome of a Pollyanna neocon.

[maddezmom]

52. "a tough problem"????? you should be facing criminal charges n/t

[markses]

8. Rumsfeld is gone

This is just the leak that twists the final knife:

From the article:

Some officers say the place to begin restructuring U.S. policy is by ousting Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, whom they see as responsible for a series of strategic and tactical blunders over the past year. Several of those interviewed said a profound anger is building within the Army at Rumsfeld and those around him.

---snip---

Looks like Colin Powell called up a few old friends and decided it was time for State to make its move. Meanwhile, Cheney is saying Rumsfeld is the best SecDef ever, and Bush and Condi pledge their strong support. In other words, the entire BushCo illusion is unravelling, and Powell is making the real power move by getting this WashPost story out. If this is not the soundbite on the shows, I'll be a little bit surprised. Watch the drama:

From the article:

Asked who was to blame, this general pointed directly at Rumsfeld and Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz. "I do not believe we had a clearly defined war strategy, end state and exit strategy before we commenced our invasion," he said. "Had someone like Colin Powell been the chairman , he would not have agreed to send troops without a clear exit strategy. The current OSD refused to listen or adhere to military advice."

----snip---

A little plug for the man at State. Jeez Louise. It will be bad. It will be bad.

[PaDUer]

18. And Meyers also...

all he does is LIE his ass off!

[saigon68]

53. MEYERS THE LIAR

NICE MAN he is the "Thug and Hoodlum" (Chimp Speak--tm) The NeoCons need to accomplish their agenda.

[LiberalFighter]

42. anger is building within the Army at Rumsfeld and those around him

Would that/should that include gw* and cheney?

[teryang]

9. The Army is pissed

<A senior general at the Pentagon said he believes the United States is already on the road to defeat...>

<Asked who was to blame, this general pointed directly at Rumsfeld and Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz. "I do not believe we had a clearly defined war strategy, end state and exit strategy before we commenced our invasion," he said. "Had someone like Colin Powell been the chairman , he would not have agreed to send troops without a clear exit strategy. The current OSD refused to listen or adhere to military advice.">

They're breaking the Army and they don't care. No big aerospace bucks in the Army. The Army is productivity oriented. Getting more from less and less, so contractors can bill more and more.

[bemildred]

14. Yup. Long time. nt

[grytpype]

10. READ THE WHOLE THING!

The Army is in open rebellion. From the article:

Tolerance of the situation in Iraq also appears to be declining within the U.S. military. Especially among career Army officers, an extraordinary anger is building at Rumsfeld and his top advisers.

"Like a lot of senior Army guys, I'm quite angry" with Rumsfeld and the rest of the Bush administration, the young general said. He listed two reasons. "One is, I think they are going to break the Army." But what really incites him, he said, is, "I don't think they care."

[krkaufman]

40. Yes, that quote stood out the most, to me n/t

[fearnobush]

45. Like the U.S. Army, I too Descent.

This is incredible, This is exactly what I heard from an officer several months ago. They are all tired of being lied to and being forced to do things they view as incompetent and done on the cheap.

[grytpype]

11. This is it. This is the last nail in the coffin of Bushism.

There's no way that "slime and defend" is going to work against this onslaught. Bush is destroying the Army with his mad project in Iraq. The Army can no longer hold its tongue.

Bush is gone by summer.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

13. Makes you wonder about how the video and pictures managed...

...to get released to the mainstream media, and then actually get published.

Is it possible that some senior officers are now actively involved in exposing the NeoCons for what they really are?

[grytpype]

15. We can hope.

It really is the only way to go at this point.

There's no bottom. This is a real crisis, and no one can possibly know what will happen.

[Beetwasher]

17. "This is a real crisis, and no one can possibly know what will happen."

Yeah. You got it alright...Seriously through throught the fucking looking glass here...Hold on tight...

[maryallen]

25. Yes, I think so.

I said on another thread that, possibly, an Army JAG officer leaked the photos to the media. That young kid who blew the whistle went to his commanding officer with complaints about the interrogations. Who's to say that the CO didn't consult JAG, and that said-lawyer, angry with Feith's "new" Pentagon policy -- ignoring the Geneva Conventions -- did an end-run around the chain-of-command and went out on a limb to "save the Army."

[PaDUer]

20. Cheney waiting in the wings! ...

He's just as bad as if not worse..No wonder he wasn't mentioned at all...Rid the entire gang! Just ridding these couple isn't the problem..This goes to the top...they're ALL involved, including pops!

[Spazito]

12. Geez, bush has pissed off the Armed Forces AND the CIA...

well done, georgie boy, well done!

[Auntie Bush]

23. Bush* has never done ANYTHING right in his whole life!

Get the GD Fool out now. We can't wait till November/Janurary.

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. This is AN OPEN REVOLT

Officers going on the record... this is major

This is not a lt, or a Captain, these are division and Corp Commanders, and Regimental commanders, this is MAJOR...

[Media_Lies_Daily]

19. And it could get REAL ugly REAL fast....

...somebody better step forward and take command of the entire military so they can act with one voice, or we're going to see another Civil War based on political ideals as opposed to the differing economic systems found in 1861.

[DemoTex]

21. Col. Hughes, I'm sorry for your loss in Vietnam.

However, many of us lost "brothers." Loved soul brothers that we cannot replace in that void in our psyche. Just like your blood brother. I am a Vietnam Veteran Against the War. Honor the warrior, not the little-boy Bu$h's sorry war. Please.

[nadinbrzezinski]

24. We do honor the soldiers,

that is why we have been fighting so damn hard... but you know as well as I do, you from Nam, me from history... nobody spoke this way until after Nam was over. The young officers promised this would never be allowed again. Now we have to fight hard to bring them home and help them rebuild the Army, and honor most of the warriors

What happened at Abu Ghraib I blame the Senior CIVILIAN leadership, as well as the people in senior positions in charge of policies. Heads need to roll, but the troops need to come home, with their heads up. They did a mission that nobody should have asked them to do, the very least with lack of equipment, and support from those who are only getting rich.

In my opinion the administrationn has betrayed the armed services and the country...

And yes my husband retired from the Navy after coming home from a second war patrol with the USN... he rerired with his head high, he did his duty with honor... but there is no honor at the level of those who have sent him, and men and women like him into harms way... there is no honor with those snakes... none whatsoever.

[Mountainman]

27. I new in 1968 that we would lose in Vietnam

After Tet I went to Ben Hoa and was talking to some Vietnamese civilians. Many of their shops had been destroyed. One woman was standing in the doorway of her shot up shop and was crying. I asked her what was she crying about. She said to me, "Why should Vietnamese die? Why not Americans die? You have everything like TV's and cars and we don't have anything."

What she wanted was to go about her daily business and not be concerned that there was a war going on. Up until Tet she could do that. She wanted us to fight the war for them. I knew that we would lose because the Vietnamese themselves did not want to fight the war. Their soldiers did not want to confront the North any longer. I knew that when we ultimately pulled out the North would take over.

[nadinbrzezinski]

36. You are right

and welcome home solider

You were sent to the jungles on a mission that could not be acoomplished, my husband was sent into harms way and they were missing critical supplies

You and him were betrayed by those in charge for different reasons.

Now we need to do what we need to do and don't allow those who would like to blame the whole army for the failures of the civilians. THis was a civilian cluster, topped by Fubared...

[TahitiNut]

29. When Rummy couldn't clearly identify the chain of command ...

... above the MP guards at Abu Ghraib during the hearings on Friday, he effectively portrayed the FUBAR confusion he has wrought in Iraq. There is no clear command authority, nor is there accountability. This is what happens when political advisors and ideologues run amok. This was deliberate. The civilian "intelligence" people have carte blanche to focus on partisan political issues in Iraq (WMD anyone?) and have neither accountability nor legal constraints. They are outlaws. The more responsible military people have got to be livid.

[calimary]

54. Spot-on, nadin - "Senior CIVILIAN leadership."

And WHO is that "Senior CIVILIAN leadership?"

Let's all remember the term "chickenhawk."

This was "Senior CIVILIAN leadership" that had NEVER seen combat, for the most part NEVER served their country, never wore their country's uniform (although bush did, and thoroughly disgraced it), and never understood what war is or does - beyond what they saw in all the John Wayne movies. THEY thought war was cool, glorious, well-lit and dramatically-staged. THEY thought it would prove and burnish their glorious manhood. They knew NOTHING.

ONLY THOSE WHO HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN TO WAR can really know.

YOUR husband went out and saw, heard, smelled, and experienced the real thing. He CAN hold his head high. He went out and did the dirty work and the heavy lifting. These over-inflated, self-important chickenshits aren't worthy to touch the hem of his garment. They have done a HUGE disservice to your husband and every other American serviceman and woman there is. They should be down on their knees begging forgiveness of your husband and all his brothers/sisters in arms. We all face WAY more than a court martial for THEIR sins.

[symbolman]

22. I wonder what would happen if

the Military Chiefs arrested Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, RIce, Wolfowitz, Meyers, etc and told Congress to get it's shit together because we need new leaders NOW..

ONly a fantasy of course, I wouldn't want anyone to come to harm.

Maybe a suicide watch for all of them in the Hague.

[AlCzervik]

26. When the hawks get booted

i hope to hell that Bush doesnt get a free pass, his choices in cabinet members prove he has no ability to lead, Kerry needs to push that.

[daleo]

28. It sounds like they are living 6 months to 1 year in the past

"Their major worry is that the United States is prevailing militarily but failing to win the support of the Iraqi people. That view is far from universal, but it is spreading, and being voiced publicly for the first time."

If they are just catching on to this fact now, it is no wonder the whole thing turned into a fiasco.

On edit - it is good that they are turning against Rummy, anyway.

[nadinbrzezinski]

37. Nah rumors of this have been ongoing for over

a year.

I heard the discontent, or rumors of it, over a year ago...

We saw the first signs of this when war plan after war plan was leaked before the war.

Most did not pay attention to it.

Now what is significant is that they are going public... the military does not have a public opinion you see. Unlike you or me they stand in front of the Constitution, not behind it.

But trust me, having lived in military housing I have heard the discontent, loud and clear... and it is far longer than just a year.

[Career Prole]

30. Two things that PISSED ME OFF about this.

The first is that in March of 2003 the State Department had already issued a classified report seemingly at odds with what the neocon chickenhawks were promoting.
Democracy in Iraq doubtful, State Dept. report says

Washington -- A classified State Department report expresses deep skepticism that installing a new regime in Iraq will foster the spread of democracy in the Middle East, a claim President Bush has made in trying to build support for a war, according to intelligence officials familiar with the document.

<snip>

The report, which has been distributed to a small group of top government officials but not publicly disclosed, says that daunting economic and social problems are likely to undermine basic stability in the region for years, let alone prospects for democratic reform.

Even if some version of democracy took root -- an event the report casts as unlikely -- anti-American sentiment is so pervasive that elections in the short term could lead to the rise of Islamic-controlled governments hostile to the United States.

<snip>

"A new regime in Iraq would serve as a dramatic and inspiring example of freedom for other nations in the region," Bush said.

Other top administration officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney, have made similar remarks in recent months.

But the argument has been pushed hardest by a group of officials and advisers who have been the leading proponents of going to war with Iraq. Prominent among them are Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy defense secretary, and Richard Perle, chairman of the Defense Policy Board, an influential Pentagon advisory panel...
...But the theory is disputed by many experts and is viewed with skepticism by analysts at the CIA and the State Department, intelligence officials said.



Now this current Washington Post article we all just read says:

The worried generals and colonels are simply beginning to say what experts outside the military have been saying for weeks.

WEEKS?! Weeks my ASS! Experts were saying democracy in Iraq was a pipe dream over a year ago, when thousands of lives could have been spared if those arrogant bastard neocons would have listened! Get bent, Wolfowitz...you stinkin' POS! :grr:

Did I say two things pissed me off? Ah, yes...there was this from a-hole Wolfowitz:

A Special Forces officer aimed higher, saying that, "Rumsfeld needs to go, as does Wolfowitz."
Asked about such antagonism, Wolfowitz said, "I wish they'd have the -- whatever it takes -- to come tell me to my face."

You SOB...that Special Forces officer has more than plenty of "whatever it takes" to tell you to your face...he might just whittle it in braille on a baseball bat and stuff it up your ass so you don't ever forget...but at the moment he's busy, as you well freakin' know! :grr: :grr: :grr: :grr: :grr: :grr:

[phiddle]

32. We'll do you one better, Mr. Wolfowitz"

(re: Asked about such antagonism, Wolfowitz said, "I wish they'd have the -- whatever it takes -- to come tell me to my face.")

We'll let Linndie England loose on you! She's trained, experienced, and knows all the tricks!

[AlCzervik]

33. How about wolfowitz

gets himself back to Iraq and stands outside the greenzone all alone. He wouldnt be a problem anymore.

[nadinbrzezinski]

39. read above this is nuanced for a reason

the reason is that the fact senior army officers have chosen to go public is unprecedented. This is many Daniel Ellsbergs coming out, not one...

I know if you have never known the culture... but this is unprecedented... they are very angry if htey are going public.

If there is one thing profesional people abhorr is wasting lives.

[bemildred]

41. You are correct.

Everything is on the line, and WaPo is printing it.
The "resolution" of the Faloojah situation was very
indicative too, that was done bottom up. We have a
failure of command, and it's not the Iraqi puppet army
this time. This is mutiny.

[daleo]

31. Plans are forming, Saddam II and Partition.

Plan A - Saddam, the Sequel

"In addition to trimming the U.S. troop presence, a young Army general said, the United States also should curtail its ambitions in Iraq. "That strategic objective, of a free, democratic, de-Baathified Iraq, is grandiose, and unattainable," he said. "It's just a matter of time before we revise downward . . . and abandon these ridiculous objectives."

Instead, he predicted that if the Bush administration wins reelection, it simply will settle for a stable Iraq, probably run by former Iraqi generals. This is more or less, he said, what the Marines Corps did in Fallujah -- which he described as a glimpse of future U.S. policy."


Plan B - Divide and Conquer, emphasis on divide

"Finally, some are calling for the United States to stop fighting separatist trends among Iraq's three major groups, the Shiites, the Sunnis and the Kurds, and instead embrace them. "The best hope for holding Iraq together -- and thereby avoiding civil war -- is to let each of its major constituent communities have, to the extent possible, the system each wants," Galbraith wrote last month."

So, what was the point of it all? To weaken and/or destroy the political entity called Iraq, perhaps. Who benefits?

[frankieT]

43. good post

i will add that in either cases, US will keep a very close eye on the OIL (a heavy mean of pressure on Asia), monitor closely the ME (Syria,Iran,Saudi Arabia) with its ally Israel, spreading mainly instability in these countries (i can't totally rule out a form of democracy). After Afghanistan, Iraq is the second messed up country south of Russia, also.
Not so bad.
But the costs are becoming high for the Empire: 5 billions a month (more soon if additional troops are sent), a degraded moral and political world-leadership, and btw who wants to kill or be killed for these objectives except mercenaries and sadistic **patriots** ?

[Strelnikov_]

34. The Ever Changing Rationale For This Adventure

Ver. 1.0 Imminent WMD threat.

Ver. 2.0 Install 'seed' democracy in middle east.

Ver. 3.0 Install 'model' dictatorship in middle east (turn country over to Republican Guard generals).

From the article:

"In addition to trimming the U.S. troop presence, a young Army general said, the United States also should curtail its ambitions in Iraq. "That strategic objective, of a free, democratic, de-Baathified Iraq, is grandiose, and unattainable," he said. "It's just a matter of time before we revise downward . . . and abandon these ridiculous objectives."

"Instead, he predicted that if the Bush administration wins reelection, it simply will settle for a stable Iraq, probably run by former Iraqi generals. This is more or less, he said, what the Marines Corps did in Fallujah -- which he described as a glimpse of future U.S. policy. "

[krkaufman]

35. Frickin' DUH!!! _ Winning the battles.... Losing the war.

And I didn't even have to go to West Point to figgur that out.

[havocmom]

38. Sounds like the Army has officers who are aware their troops are hostages

held by the neocon junta, endangered by the neocon junta, subverted by the neocon junta and dishonored by the neocon junta. They have been committed to battle for the worst of reasons by the worst of mankind.

Somebody better clue Cheney into the fact that his little bunker just might not be deep enough to save his hide when those under his command decide they no longer are.

[fearnobush]

46. Wow!

One Pentagon consultant said that officials with whom he works on Iraq policy continue to put on a happy face publicly, but privately are grim about the situation in Baghdad.

When it comes to discussions of the administration's Iraq policy, he said, "It's 'Dead Man Walking.' "

[VolcanoJen]

44. My God, what a damaging, and revolutionary, article.

Not only have Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz lost their much-desired war... they've lost the Army.

Amazing, earth-shattering article. Expect Russert to bring this piece up to Wes Clark in the morning!

[nadinbrzezinski]

47. Wes most be LIVID

though he hinted it in his last book, waging modern war

[Leilani]

48. This is truly an amazing article!

But I am not at all surprised.

The military was against this war from the beginning. Many of them made that clear before the war started.

As General Anthony Zinni said about this war...It is a brain fart!

He then received a standing ovation from a room full of Naval & Marine Officers.

[anarchy1999]

49. Here it is!

"I lost my brother in Vietnam," added Hughes, a veteran Army strategist who is involved in formulating Iraq policy. "I promised myself, when I came on active duty, that I would do everything in my power to prevent that from happening again. Here I am, 30 years later, thinking we will win every fight and lose the war, because we don't understand the war we're in."


Deserves to be all caps and in Bold! "...we don't understand the war we're in."

Why are we in this war? Remind me please, once again.

[xchrom]

50. pnac meet reality

[0007]

55. Wolfowitz still doesn't get it!! I do think the man is crazy

A Special Forces officer aimed higher, saying that "Rumsfeld needs to go, as does Wolfowitz."

...and many many Senators and Congressmen are against you.


Asked about such antagonism, Wolfowitz said, "I wish they'd have the -- whatever it takes -- to come tell me to my face."

I witnessed a whole room of students getting after Wolfowitz, even throwing things and he didn't do a thing. The media is against you. And like I said many Senators and Congressmen are against you. Ten million people protested against you and your war prez.

He said that by contrast, he had been "struck at how many fairly senior officers have come to me" to tell him that he and Rumsfeld have made the right decisions concerning the Army.

junior's policy is "you're either with us or against us" the senior officers that have came forward are now gone. Go figure.

[maddezmom]

56. kick

[NewYorkerfromMass]

57. indeed..... kick.

[LeftHander]

58. Bush marching down there to squash dissent....

No doubt with Cheney in tow...

Sure he'll give the smirking threats to career and family....to keep the military in line.