A "failure of the national political leadership" is responsible for the “nightmare†of the Iraq war, retired Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez said Friday. If some of America’s political leaders were in the military they would have been relieved or court-martialed long ago, Sanchez told a conference of military journalists. "Neglect and incompetence" by the National Security Council has led to an intractable situation in Iraq, the former commander of coalition forces in Iraq said. ......................... Sanchez said the war in Iraq is "a nightmare with no end in sight" http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21272663/
The MSM is already trying to paint him as someone with an ax to grind, as someone who might be writing a book about this and building face time.
Well it makes a change from constantly moaning about Iraq everyday, it's starting to become boring listening to the MSM.
For using the media to push his grudge over being forced to retire over his role in the Abu Ghraib scandal. Am I the only person to notice that he didn't really have anything to say -- other than that he was unhappy? If he had anything real to say, he would have said it. He would have had clear observations and made concrete criticisms complete with recommended actions. He would have behaved like an officer. Instead, he just got on TV and did a tremendous disservice to America by pushing his personal agendas with little concern about the collateral damage he would cause.
Yet he's not the only retired top brass coming out against the war. But yep it's gotta be personal agenda. Funny how when he was in the service the pro war people took his word as gospel. Now that he's out of it and allowed to speak his mind it's gotta be personal agenda. If he was still for the war would it be a personal agenda, or would that be another thing to jump up and down for and say 'see the x commander speaks the truth' ? Puzzling.
If he had actually said anything, I would have listened. As it is, he has said nothing. He has not defined a problem. He has made no recommendations for action. All he has done is say "the people who forced me to resign are bad." What puzzles me is that any competent military officer should be able to write a problem definition and action plan. The fact that he can't is a very bad sign concerning our officer corps.
He did not say anything while in action and while he had powers. Now that he has been ripped off he seems to be attacking the policies to defend himself.
For one the quotes are just that quotes, not everything he said. It was also a first time speaking, who knows what question was asked, how much time given? Yes because when in the service commanders are just able to spout off their true beliefs The policies that have been a failure for years?
Officers are expected to perform well under pressure. Not the weak kind of pressure you get from a bobble headed TV reporter -- the real kind of pressure you get from incoming fire. Just about any time that live fire is not incoming -- that's why they are called commanders. This guy was a General, not a PFC. And yet he's acting worse than a butterbar. It is difficult to fathom.
Yet you know what he said behind closed doors during his command? Unless you do there is absolutely no way to know. In the public eye commanders during their time in the military are not going to bad mouth the administration or the war. If they did you and every other war lover would be talking about what a bad commander they were Well under pressure, again we do not know the entire discussion, a few quotes. How are you able to mince that into something it isn't, unless of course your only desire is to take away from what he says and discredit him. Nope couldn't be that.
Please show me where I stated that. Of course not. The proper task of a commander is to inform his senior officer, privately, that he's an idiot and his orders are inconceivably horrible. That's the way that the military runs. I haven't minced anything into something that isn't -- there isn't anything to mince. There is no content. Lefties seems to be taking his sparse statements and painting is as if he suddenly endorsed every kooky idea the leftwing ever came up with. What I am saying is that his statements are content-free. They have no meaning other than "I'm unhappy." Well, I'm sorry he's unhappy. Perhaps he wasn't relieved of command because he was an idiot whose incompetence was responsible for prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib. All we do know is that, he just got on TV and did a tremendous disservice to America by pushing his personal agendas with little concern about the collateral damage he would cause. <-- and that is mostly using his own words. But now the lefties have a champion -- one of the very men they vilified so very recently for the prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib. Isn't it funny how short peoples memories are?
Actually you are mincing it. You yourself state there is no content, yet we do not know the entire statement. Nor do we know under what circumstance they were taken. Was it a 5 minute quick interview, something that actually gave him time to give a more accurate and complete statement? We do not know, yet you're taking it to be something other than what it is. So if he was pro war still would that be a personal agenda? Speaking out at all of course has to be a personal agenda even if it's the truth according to your logic.
I am taking it for nothing more than it is -- which is nothing. He's not dead. If he has anything to say, let him say it! Now that he's gone on the record and made an ass out of himself (again) on the international stage, we're all listening! I would just like to see some content this time. The military even issues FORMS that he can use for this purpose.
The so-called surge of troops in Iraq is "a desperate attempt by the administration..." He seems to be saying something right there ~~~~~~~~~~~ Surrender Should Not Be an Option by Dr. Ron Paul
See! At least Grandpa Paul has a message! And he's a gynecologist -- what kind of stress do they have to operate under? Paul is wrong, because he's only thinking one move ahead. It's clear that chess isn't his game. But at least he knows what that one next move is. What I want to see from Ricardo is his recommendation for our next few moves. Of course, one of the very few things that Ricardo did say completely contradicts Paul's strategy. He said "America has no choice but to continue fighting or the country will sink into chaos, which will spread throughout the Middle East." Paul would have us leave Iraq to be divided up between Al Qaeda and the Iranians.