# US general damns Iraq 'nightmare'



## zegnamtl (Apr 19, 2005)

https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7042805.stm

US general damns Iraq 'nightmare'

Lt Gen Ricardo Sanchez said the US currently was only delaying defeat
A former US military chief in Iraq has condemned the current strategy in the conflict, which he warned was "a nightmare with no end in sight".
Retired Lt Gen Ricardo Sanchez also labelled US political leaders as "incompetent" and "corrupted".

He said they would have faced courts martial for dereliction of duty had they been in the military.

The best the US could manage under the current approach in Iraq was to "stave off defeat", Gen Sanchez warned.

"There is no question that America is living a nightmare with no end in sight," he said, addressing journalists at Arlington, near Washington.................................


----------



## Spence (Feb 28, 2006)

Either a liberal or a malcontent. What's more alarming is how a top US officer could want the troops to fail so much.

-spence


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

The Ken Burns WW2 series continues to educate me. I knew of our defeat at Kasserine, but not of the general bunkered in a stone dugout miles behind the lines and called coward outright . I knew of the famed 442, but not of their losses saving the Lost Battalion and another incompetent general's reputation. The american Caesar MacArthur certainly displayed failures of leadership. And now this general waits until the safe bunker of retirement to play Klause Von Stauffenberg. Enlisted ranks speak out or refuse duty at peril of court martial. Generals bide their time and go on the lecture circuit.


----------



## Martinis at 8 (Apr 14, 2006)

Spence said:


> Either a liberal or a malcontent. What's more alarming is how a top US officer could want the troops to fail so much.
> 
> -spence


Quite the opposite. Sanchez is actually correct.

The maneuver and capture of Baghdad was brilliant. It was the Liberal "Hearts & Minds" strategy that led to the insurgency. We let the enemy army melt away into the civilian population only to rise and fight another day. Instead of playing around with pin-point bombing accuracy, and dropping leaflets telling the enemy soldiers to go home, we should have told them to stay in their vehicles and completely destroyed as many of them as possible in the field, while at the same time making Baghdad look like Stalingrad. An army is killed by killing its soldiers, not by destroying its equipment. Whatever remnants were left of that army should have then been employed under the auspices of the US Army, just as was done in Germany and Japan.

The fact is, George Bush is a Liberal, as is his father and his grandfather. They all should have left the Republican party along with the Rockefeller family. They are traditional Patrician Northeastern Yankee Republican snobs. Being that GWB is a Liberal, it is not surprising that he fights a war like LBJ fought Vietnam.

M8


----------



## Martinis at 8 (Apr 14, 2006)

Kav said:


> The Ken Burns WW2 series continues to educate me. I knew of our defeat at Kasserine, but not of the general bunkered in a stone dugout miles behind the lines and called coward outright . I knew of the famed 442, but not of their losses saving the Lost Battalion and another incompetent general's reputation. The American Caesar MacArthur certainly displayed failures of leadership. And now this general waits until the safe bunker of retirement to play Klause Von Stauffenberg. Enlisted ranks speak out or refuse duty at peril of court martial. Generals bide their time and go on the lecture circuit.


Kav,

Yes, to all of the above. However, with all due respect I don't think you have this quite correct regarding Sanchez. He can't really run his mouth externally. That's the military way. However, what we should all realize is that within the Army itself there is a brawl going on between those who want to fight this like a war, and those who want to manage the war as if it were some course in international affairs out of Harvard. In the case of this war, the pansy Ivy League educated group prevailed. Even in Petraeus' case, we must recall that he was the leading proponent of the strategy that led to this catastrophe. He changed his tune when the writing on the wall became obvious, then got his "surge" vision. He is a true life Courtney Massengale.

They should have cashiered the lot of them, and put some of these fighting colonels and lieutenant colonels in charge. Dave Perkins would have made good choice, or some other 'killer' colonel.

M8


----------



## rip (Jul 13, 2005)

Martinis at 8 said:


> Kav,
> 
> Yes, to all of the above. However, with all due respect I don't think you have this quite correct regarding Sanchez. He can't really run his mouth externally. That's the military way. However, what we should all realize is that within the Army itself there is a brawl going on between those who want to fight this like a war, and those who want to manage the war as if it were some course in international affairs out of Harvard. In the case of this war, the pansy Ivy League educated group prevailed. Even in Petraeus' case, we must recall that he was the leading proponent of the strategy that led to this catastrophe. He changed his tune when the writing on the wall became obvious, then got his "surge" vision. He is a true life Courtney Massengale.
> 
> ...


It never ceases to amaze, how bloodthirsty you are, the lot of you. "Killer colonels, indeed". You make me ashamed to be an American.


----------



## Martinis at 8 (Apr 14, 2006)

rip said:


> It never ceases to amaze, how bloodthirsty you are, the lot of you. "Killer colonels, indeed". You make me ashamed to be an American.


Well then go live in Russia or the Czech Republic. Find yourself a gulag or two.

Point is, if one is going to go to war, then one should go to win, and not to dick around with our soldiers lives for the sake of winning "hearts & minds" of the enemy or for satisfying some Liberal feel-good philosophy coming out of an Ivy League school.

Now how do like 'dem apples, eh?

M8


----------



## rip (Jul 13, 2005)

Martinis at 8 said:


> Well then go live in Russia or the Czech Republic. Find yourself a gulag or two.
> 
> Point is, if one is going to go to war, then one should go to win, and not to dick around with our soldiers lives for the sake of winning "hearts & minds" of the enemy or for satisfying some Liberal feel-good philosophy coming out of an Ivy League school.
> 
> ...


In case you are unaware of recent events, the only gulags in eastern Europe are those run by the CIA. Apparently, you washed out of the Ivy League? Pity! Or maybe they wouldn't have you in the first place. You want to save American lives? Close down the war, turn around, walk away. It's that simple. You warlovers either can't or won't learn that lesson; I suspect it's "won't". You have the mentality of 6 year olds in the sandbox fighting for turf; you think what you imagine is your manhood is at stake, when all it really is is blowhard macho bravado.


----------



## Spence (Feb 28, 2006)

Martinis at 8 said:


> Point is, if one is going to go to war, then one should go to win, and not to dick around with our soldiers lives for the sake of winning "hearts & minds" of the enemy or for satisfying some Liberal feel-good philosophy coming out of an Ivy League school.
> 
> Now how do like 'dem apples, eh?


This would make a lot of sense if our war was with the Iraqi people and not the Iraqi leadership.

But considering the reality on the ground what you're saying makes little practical sense and would (I'd wager) have led us to a much broader and more bloody conflict very rapidly.

-spence


----------



## whomewhat (Nov 11, 2006)

rip said:


> It never ceases to amaze, how bloodthirsty you are, the lot of you. "Killer colonels, indeed". You make me ashamed to be an American.


So exactly what do you think the job description of a soldier is? They fight wars and the goal of a war is to kill the enemy. That may not sound pleasant, but that is the reality. It is the responsibility of our leaders to prevent war, but our military fight it by killing the enemy, period. If you want a philosophical discussion on the nature of humanity, that's one thing, but the others have it right. It is the job of the military to kill the military of our enemies and that is not something most can stomach. Bloodthirsty? Are we supposed to engage the enemy in a pillow fight? I just don't understand. Ashamed to be an American? Because our military kills people, which is their job, or because our political leaders are not letting them do their job? If it is because of the latter, then I understand. I don't agree, but I understand.

War should be as ugly as is humanly possible so that it becomes a thing to be avoided. Precision bombing, which is supposed to insure that we hit as many targets as possible, as opposed to carpet bombing where we drop as many bombs as we can and hope they hit something, has become a political tool. Now, we use precision bombings to limit civilian casualties, making their use more acceptable politically. Someone is misbehaving somewhere in the world, no problem send in a few cruise missiles from a nuclear sub, at night, and take out a few facilities. No muss no fuss, and acceptable to most. Level an entire city and kill everyone, well, no one would want that, including the enemy. Why do you think Saddam Hussein, if he really had no WMD's, didn't just allow the inspectors full access to everything they wanted, completely unfettered, which would have prevented the war and kept him in power? He knew we would utilize precision bombing, limit civilian casualties, and he thought he could just wait it out and he'd be back. Well, he was mostly right, other than him coming back. If he really thought we were going to go in and do what our military does best, kill his entire army and anyone dumb or unfortunate enough to be caught near them, I don't think he would have made the same decision. We have made war too neat and clean and it is supposed to be UGLY!

A Few Good Men​
*Col. Jessep*: Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Whose gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinburg? I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago, and you curse the marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. That Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to.

The problem in Iraq is that we are no longer fighting a war, we our a police force, trying to maintain order and stop violence. Our Marines are utlized as a swat team, they go in when we have intelligence of an armed force held up somewhere that requires the type of force the Marines utilize to bring them down. Iraq is South Central LA when the riots were going on only on a much larger scale.

This is the exact reason I begged my son to stay our of the Marine Corps because he was not going to be used as a Marine and that is what he is trained as. Thankfully, for two years, his training and experience has been more important to the military at Camp Pendleton than it is in Iraq. However, currently, he is scheduled for the second rotation in 2008 in Iraq, unless his commanding officers change their minds, again, as they have done three times previously. I do not want my son to deploy, not because Marines do dangerous work, but because the Marines are NOT fighting a war, which is what they are trained to do. That is what makes their current job so dangerous. Fortunately, his job will put him at the Command and Operations Center, presumably the safest place in Iraq, but what of all the other Marines who don't get to stay in the COC? What of all the soldiers patrolling the steets as a police force? Either let them destroy the enemy or let the enemy destroy each other.

Okay, I've said enough. I already regret writing this as I know some are going to tear me apart, but I am so tired of hearing this "I am ashamed to be an American" crap. I don't want my son to die for a bunch of people who are ashamed to be Americans. He is better than that.


----------



## Martinis at 8 (Apr 14, 2006)

rip said:


> In case you are unaware of recent events, the only gulags in eastern Europe are those run by the CIA. Apparently, you washed out of the Ivy League? Pity! Or maybe they wouldn't have you in the first place. You want to save American lives? Close down the war, turn around, walk away. It's that simple. You warlovers either can't or won't learn that lesson; I suspect it's "won't". You have the mentality of 6 year olds in the sandbox fighting for turf; you think what you imagine is your manhood is at stake, when all it really is is blowhard macho bravado.


I'm very aware of recent events. Actually, I never applied to an Ivy League school. I did, however, graduate from West Point. Gulags run by the CIA? You are correct. The CIA historically is an Ivy League enclave. Bush is also from an Ivy League school as well as his daddy and other Bush clan members. Connect the dots buddy-boy.

Mentality of a 6-yr old? You have the mentality of someone not in touch with warfare nor military history. A nation fights a war to win, not to try out intellectual solutions while letting soldiers ride around in jeeps for 3+ years so that they can get blown up.



Spence said:


> This would make a lot of sense if our war was with the Iraqi people and not the Iraqi leadership...


That's why this war at most should have been just a punitive expedition. That means you go in, and (1) topple the regime, (2) try them and execute them offshore on a naval vessel, and then (3) put the next batter up and exit rapidly with a stern warning not too mess with us again or we will repeat as necessary.



whomewhat said:


> So exactly what do you think the job description of a soldier is? They fight wars and the goal of a war is to kill the enemy. That may not sound pleasant, but that is the reality. It is the responsibility of our leaders to prevent war, but our military fight it by killing the enemy, period. If you want a philosophical discussion on the nature of humanity, that's one thing, but the others have it right. It is the job of the military to kill the military of our enemies and that is not something most can stomach....


This is well said.

Cheers,

M8


----------



## rip (Jul 13, 2005)

Martinis at 8 said:


> I'm very aware of recent events. Actually, I never applied to an Ivy League school. I did, however, graduate from West Point. Gulags run by the CIA? You are correct. The CIA historically is an Ivy League enclave. Bush is also from an Ivy League school as well as his daddy and other Bush clan members. Connect the dots buddy-boy.
> 
> Mentality of a 6-yr old? You have the mentality of someone not in touch with warfare nor military history. A nation fights a war to win, not to try out intellectual solutions while letting soldiers ride around in jeeps for 3+ years so that they can get blown up.
> 
> ...


Or you don't fight a war at all! For some reason, you seem incapable of comprehending this. Perhaps it's your fine "West Point Education".


----------



## Martinis at 8 (Apr 14, 2006)

rip said:


> Or you don't fight a war at all! For some reason, you seem incapable of comprehending this. Perhaps it's your fine "West Point Education".


That's also a possibility, but since you are intent on making this personal, kiss my ass!

M8


----------



## globetrotter (Dec 30, 2004)

[email protected]

a lot of time I don't agree with you. on these posts I agree with you 100%.


----------



## Martinis at 8 (Apr 14, 2006)

globetrotter said:


> [email protected]
> 
> a lot of time I don't agree with you. on these posts I agree with you 100%.


Well we just need not to do wars half-ass. Do it right or don't do it all.

A punitive expedition would have been the right way to handle this. It would have gotten the point across nicely with a minimal amount of casualties. Same with Afghanistan, as all that negotiating at Tora Bora was more laughable than the Paris Peace Accords of Vietnam. Meanwhile Bin Laden slips into Pakistan.

Instead of smart warfighting, we get Bush, a president who campaigned against nation-building, doing the exact opposite of what he said he would NOT do. If he wanted to fight a national-type war against Iraq, then he should have staffed for it correctly and rubbled the place. Instead he brought in a bunch of intellectual pansies (civilian and military) to help him "intellectualize" his way through this thing. Meanwhile our soldiers got to ride around in jeeps wondering when the next IED was going to pop.

M8


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Rip, I'm on patrol at Tillamook Bay. Radio message alerts us a runner was coming in with drugs and to 'do our best' to track it until DEA and Oregon State troopers could arrive. Boat comes up and ignores my hail to heave to. Obsolescent 36' MLBs weren't exactly state of the art even in those days of non existent funding. I managed to cut him off anyway and he went around for another pass. I retrieved our 1917 Remington line throwing rifle and put a bronze line projectile into the flying bridge glass missing his head by inches. He cut engines and surrendered. His later plaintive " the Coast Guard isn't supposed to do stuff like that" was paired by an official reprimand from my group commander ( the one who wanted to be notified first if we ever deployed the 2 M- 16s and 4 1911s in our station armoury.) I was told " The Coast Guard doesn't do this." Somewhere in between the old Lexus 'pussy willows' ad campaign and the touchy feely recruiting commercials a social disjunct between the real world and our intentions rose with greater assymmetry than an Abrams tank and iranian munitions. Win, lose or draw, the veterans of this war have my empathy, given their history and future is being written by illiterates.


----------



## Martinis at 8 (Apr 14, 2006)

Kav said:


> Rip, I'm on patrol at Tillamook Bay. Radio message alerts us a runner was coming in with drugs and to 'do our best' to track it until DEA and Oregon State troopers could arrive. Boat comes up and ignores my hail to heave to. Obsolescent 36' MLBs weren't exactly state of the art even in those days of non existent funding. I managed to cut him off anyway and he went around for another pass. I retrieved our 1917 Remington line throwing rifle and put a bronze line projectile into the flying bridge glass missing his head by inches. He cut engines and surrendered. His later plaintive " the Coast Guard isn't supposed to do stuff like that" was paired by an official reprimand from my group commander ( the one who wanted to be notified first if we ever deployed the 2 M- 16s and 4 1911s in our station armoury.) I was told " The Coast Guard doesn't do this." Somewhere in between the old Lexus 'pussy willows' ad campaign and the touchy feely recruiting commercials a social disjunct between the real world and our intentions rose with greater assymmetry than an Abrams tank and iranian munitions. Win, lose or draw, the veterans of this war have my empathy, given their history and future is being written by illiterates.


Nice one *Kav*. Well said.


----------



## DukeGrad (Dec 28, 2003)

*KAV*

KAV

Nice one, you are right on target here my friend. Martinis you are a West Pointer! Love the THAYER this time of year!
I agree, RIP is a little short on this, the CIA does not run the Eastern bloc, DOD still has a big hand in that.
I do not think the CIA had any control in this theater, except to create havoc, which they have done all along!
And everywhere else!

Nice day my friends


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

Kav said:


> Win, lose or draw, the veterans of this war have my empathy, given their history and future is being written by illiterates.


Saddam Hussein was deposed in six weeks. What we've had since is a four year occupation of a country who doesn't want us there.

Wars can be won. Occupations cannot. There is no possibility of "winning" in Iraq. The only remaining question is, how many more lives and billions of dollars are we going to flush right down the toilet?


----------



## zegnamtl (Apr 19, 2005)

Wow,

I read that BBC pice before heading out to a wedding yesterday, and thought...a few angles could be at play here.

None of which involved dragging out the same old political slants, biases, slurs and crapping on each other.
But I guess I learn slowly, I have to just stay out the Interchange, too little discussion, too much bar room brawling.


Kav, 

as usual, a great read.


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

rip said:


> In case you are unaware of recent events, the only gulags in eastern Europe are those run by the CIA. Apparently, you washed out of the Ivy League? Pity! Or maybe they wouldn't have you in the first place. You want to save American lives? Close down the war, turn around, walk away. It's that simple. You warlovers either can't or won't learn that lesson; I suspect it's "won't". You have the mentality of 6 year olds in the sandbox fighting for turf; you think what you imagine is your manhood is at stake, when all it really is is blowhard macho bravado.


This wimpering needs to quit. The right people would have never won WWl and WWll with the wimpering you wrote above, what a humand embarrassment. It does matter that a war is fought properly, and Bush, instead, has made a fool of himself. Wars are part of life, you can't run from them all.

As far as the Iraq war the Iraq people want to be losers over there. What else can you say. And such a wacky culture we should never have gone over there in the first place.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

WA, If eastern Africa is the cradle of mankind( please, just insert your biblical geographical template and call it the Garden of Eden, one debate at a time) then the modern , western powers construct of Iraq is, and forever will be the cradle of civilisation with the rise of our first city states and the recorded word. And if we are not to be 'wacky' or distortion of what we claim to be, ' wimpering' online, on the public green, scribed in clay tablets or on the walls of urinals must be guarded by all. Americans are still the one race than can more or less call their leaders a bunch of dumb S.O.B.s and those leaders only devise is to call them dumb S.O.B.s back. It's called freedom.


----------



## DukeGrad (Dec 28, 2003)

*KAV*

Kav

If I had met you, you would be my best friend!!
Have a nice day Kav. Nice comments my friend.

Nice day gentlemen


----------



## Droog (Aug 29, 2006)

Sanchez can't have it both ways whatever one's take on Iraq. When in command, he painted a rosey picture in his public statements. If he really believed otherwise, he could and should have retired or requested reassignment, which would have been the honorable thing to do. To speak out now seems morale cowardice.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

O.K. to be fair in re examination Sanchez probably did what we've all done at some job we needed for x more paychecks or to secure a pension or 100% 401K co payment. It's nice to imagine every shave tail LT is going to have the vision of A Billy Mitchell or become uber Marine like Chesty Puller. There are enough victims of the Iraq debacle. Biting everything in sight and ourselves like an injured coyote won't help.


----------



## Droog (Aug 29, 2006)

What is hard to reconcile is Sanchez's current stridency with his former position. Moreover, we're talking about lives and the country that are at stake. It's one thing to support the mission and keep his mouth shut; it's quite another to be so vehement with soldiers, formerly his soldiers, still there carrying out the mission. It's so very, well, McClellan-like.


----------



## jackmccullough (May 10, 2006)

Do you have some examples of Sanchez's prior statements handy? It would be interesting, even though his statements in 2007 won't necessarily say much about whether he was right or wrong in 2003.


----------



## zegnamtl (Apr 19, 2005)

DukeGrad said:


> Kav
> 
> If I had met you, you would be my best friend!!
> Have a nice day Kav. Nice comments my friend.
> ...


Dukegrad,

I always thought my dad would have felt the same way about Kav.
Shame their paths never crossed, there could have been some great story tellin' evenings that would have burned a spot in a young boy's memory for ever after being witness to such an evening!

The three of you together.....
no limit I would I guess.


----------



## Droog (Aug 29, 2006)

jackmccullough said:


> Do you have some examples of Sanchez's prior statements handy? It would be interesting, even though his statements in 2007 won't necessarily say much about whether he was right or wrong in 2003.


Did a quick Google search and found this example at https://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE2D7113CF935A25751C1A9659C8B63. There's others.

Regards.

---------------

From NYT

December 16, 2003
*THE CAPTURE OF HUSSEIN: THE OCCUPATION; U.S. Troops Are Expected to Remain in Iraq at Least a 'Couple More Years,' Commander Says *

By ROGER COHEN 
United States and allied troops will have to remain in Iraq for at least ''a couple more years'' to secure the country's stability and protect its borders against attack, the American commander of those forces said in an interview in Baghdad on Saturday. 
Speaking hours before the capture later that day of Saddam Hussein, the commander, Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, said the United States was ''moving very aggressively to try to hand over responsibility to Iraqi security forces and build their capacity in some key areas.'' But this transfer would take ''awhile,'' and not be completed by the time Iraq is scheduled to regain its sovereignty, on June 30, 2004. 
The general, appearing relaxed and declaring himself ''absolutely optimistic'' even before Mr. Hussein was found, said any realistic look at the current state of the Iraqi security forces -- essentially an emergent army, police and civil defense corps -- led to the conclusion that ''at least a couple more years of involvement of coalition forces'' would be needed. 
Col. William Darley, a spokesman for General Sanchez, said yesterday that the capture of Mr. Hussein had changed nothing in the general's assessment, the first mention from the American commander in Iraq of a minimum two-year time frame for the allied deployment. ''We will still be needed to help the Iraqi forces,'' Colonel Darley said. 
General Sanchez portrayed the task confronting the United States as involving not only the equipping and training of an Iraqi Army and police force but also their education in ''our philosophy.'' 
The chief tenets to be absorbed by the Iraqis include acceptance of civilian control of the military and the establishment of a police force ''in support of the people, not in support of the regime,'' he said, noting that such shifts in attitude take time. 
If the current plan to transfer sovereignty to an Iraqi government in mid-2004 remains in force, General Sanchez's comments suggest that American forces will have to work with the new government, whatever its final form, for at least the ensuing 18 months, until the end of 2005. 
The terms of that cooperation have yet to be agreed upon. An accord on how allied forces will continue to operate in the country after an Iraqi government takes office is to be negotiated during the next several months. 
General Sanchez, speaking in his office in Mr. Hussein's former Republican Palace in the heart of Baghdad, said it was essential that the envisaged agreement between the American-led coalition and Iraqi authorities on the status of forces allows American troops to meet their commitment to support the Iraqi Army and police over time. 
After the overthrow of Saddam Hussein's government in April, the Iraqi Army was disbanded while the police force largely disintegrated. Both are now being reconstituted, although dissatisfaction over pay -- about $60 a month for a private -- has led to desertions from the embryonic army. 
General Sanchez said he was ''very happy'' with the current level of allied forces in Iraq -- 120,000 Americans and 15,000 troops from other countries -- and suggested that it might be feasible to begin to reduce that presence in the second half of next year as the Iraqi Army, civil defense corps and police emerge. 
He outlined, without going into detail, a plan under which control of cities and certain regions would be gradually ceded to Iraqis in 2004. As this process unfolded, he suggested, ''A year from now it could be feasible that we look at our postures.'' He was referring to possible reductions in allied troop levels in Iraq. 
As American military units rotate next year, General Sanchez expects the forces at his command to become ''lighter'' and more mobile, with more infantry and fewer heavy combat units. No further troop contributions from other countries, other than perhaps a small contingent from Japan, are expected. 
By the spring, he said, 36 battalions of the Iraqi civil defense corps would be formed. By September, there would be three Iraqi Army divisions. ''We will begin to draw ourselves down as the Iraqis take over responsibility,'' he said. 
Asked to define what would constitute success in the American military mission, General Sanchez said, ''I think success for us is when there is an Iraqi political system able to function in a democratic environment, and some semblance of a security structure able to maintain law and order,'' as well as guarantee Iraq's sovereignty. 
General Sanchez said much of his troops' efforts were focused on securing what he called the consent of the Iraqi people. ''The majority must remain at least neutral,'' he observed. In general, he said he believed that Americans were doing ''a good job of minimizing the alienation'' among Iraq's 25 million people. 
For example, when a United States military operation results in civilian casualties or damaged property, civil affairs units move in quickly to ''look at those wronged,'' he said. Payments, often of $2,000 to $2,500 dollars, are then made to those who suffered, the general said. 
When the subject of American dead and wounded arose, General Sanchez appeared pensive, revealing that it was hard for him to look, every day, at the casualty figures for his soldiers. 
''Sometimes I feel the weight of the world on my shoulders,'' he said. ''I pray every day that I get the wisdom and knowledge to make the right decisions,'' in a mission he described as central to America's future security. 
''There is a tremendous burden here on young Americans,'' he said. ''They go out into a 360-degree battlefield. I want to complete this task at the least possible cost to America's sons and daughters.''


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

Kav said:


> WA, If eastern Africa is the cradle of mankind( please, just insert your biblical geographical template and call it the Garden of Eden, one debate at a time) then the modern , western powers construct of Iraq is, and forever will be the cradle of civilisation with the rise of our first city states and the recorded word. And if we are not to be 'wacky' or distortion of what we claim to be, ' wimpering' online, on the public green, scribed in clay tablets or on the walls of urinals must be guarded by all. Americans are still the one race than can more or less call their leaders a bunch of dumb S.O.B.s and those leaders only devise is to call them dumb S.O.B.s back. It's called freedom.


Since you brought Christianity into this. I don't know why you bother to think you are a Christian when you don't believe the Bible.

What rip said if I spoke like that as a child I got a whipping. And it didn't take me long to figure out why. As far a freedom of speech you are right. People ought to learn to think right so they don't say foolish things. It is their responsiblity to shut their mouth. As the saying goes they ought to pull themselves up by their boot straps. It is the wimpering liberals that want to take away your gun rights and remove gun companies from this world. Which means the honest people can't get them and the criminals will always have them. The liberals love revolving prison doors- two steps in and your out. Birds of a feather flock together. I have been around felons that have been in and out many times- they never learn. They have no human decency. No respect. All they want is to do their crimes and not to get caught. Brothers keeper they are not, nor those that support there unending criminal behavior. It is almost impossible to work someplace that does not have criminals working there. Even Churchs can't escape mafia thugs from sneaking in and pretending to be good solid Christians, so your childs Sunday School teacher might be using the Church as a falsefront.


----------



## DukeGrad (Dec 28, 2003)

*Sanchez*

Zegnamtl,

Thank you as well,KAV is a patriotic man, and is quite forthright, which I admire. He is to the point, making it quite clear how he feels.

General Sanchez is on the mark, gentlemen. What he does not elaborate on is the true numbers, and involvement is not like the CIA report to the president, which triples our soldiers involvement here, which we do no have.
High op tempo at the 10th Mountain, the 101st and so on is also taking a greater toll that DOD expected.
Our Marine Corps and Navy and US Air Force are going through the same.
Just a mess my friends, you all have a nice day.
To the gym!

Nice day gentlemen


----------



## DukeGrad (Dec 28, 2003)

*Gentlemen*

Gentlemen,

Mot military types will understand when I say op tempo. With this, it also involves DOD, the VA system as well. They are able to cope, this is obvious in our response to the military. The differences between DOD and the VA still remain, even afte an IG inspection. We are not able to respond fairly to the military.
A freaking mess, one thing we need is to replace the president. We need a dem, to resolve things.
Anyway, to the gym, you all have a nice day

Airborne, De Opresso Liber


----------



## Droog (Aug 29, 2006)

OPTEMPO is, of course, inextricably linked to the force structure. The post-Vietnam Army was at the Congressionally-mandated 781,000 until the peace dividend Army of, IIRC, the low 400,000s that started under Bush Sr. and bumped back up a little for the Gulf War. What changed was the increased deployments with this smaller Army, first under Bush Sr. for the Gulf and then under Clinton for miscellaneous brushfires. The first small signs of fraying around the edges in the Army were starting to be seen in the mid-nineties. In this way, it is a bit unfair to saddle Clinton with the Army downsizing except in the context of increased OPTEMO while he was in office.

The current deployments to Southwest Asia are of a different order of magnitude, of course, and the Army is just not big enough to sustain the requisite deployment, redeployment, refitting and train-up at an acceptable pace. Especially hard hit is the Reserve Component, especially the Army Reserve, where a lot of the Army's logistical capability was placed as part of the peace dividend. That capability was to be mobilized only for a large scale, sustained deployment. The current situation in Southwest Asia is exactly this, requiring the Army Force Generation process to dip into the reserves to support such operations logistically and to ease pressure on the Active Component brigades by deploying National Guard maneuver units. Units from other services are even being deployed to fulfill Army tasks if they have the appropriate capability as identified in the new readiness reporting process. This all points to the need to reduce the Army's commitment or increase its force structure, or a combination of the two.


----------



## DukeGrad (Dec 28, 2003)

*Droog*

Droog,

Excellent point my friend. What is not being recognized is the wear and tear on the NG units, who are being piece mealed over; such as an aviation company to fill in over their. And an ambulance company there. The 42 ID fulfilled their mission for a years time. They are still being picked apart for support.All NG units as well as reserve. You are right, they have to do one of two things. I am hoping we cater the storm. And survive. When new president in place, things will be better.
On top of all this, the country itself is feeling the wear and tear of this mess.
When military speak out, and it is not the private or sgt doing so, it is full bird COL, LTC and so on.Someone has to listen.
Nice day my friend


----------



## DukeGrad (Dec 28, 2003)

*Gentlemen*

Gentlemen,

The last time we were pressed and spread out was WW2. We were in 2 theaters of operation. Spread out all over the freaking world.
We did something that time, we never regretted to this day.
To this very day, we do not feel pain for dropping just 2 bombs my friends.
My dad was in the Pacific theater.
And I think most military historians have educated us about what happend back then.
Have nice day my friends


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

DukeGrad said:


> Gentlemen,
> 
> The last time we were pressed and spread out was WW2. We were in 2 theaters of operation. Spread out all over the freaking world.
> We did something that time, we never regretted to this day.
> ...


That has to be the sickest post I've ever read on AAAC.

"We" remain the one and only nation who has ever used nuclear weapons on civilian populations. And "they" are still dying of radiation related illnesses OVER SIXTY YEARS LATER.

You know, I never believed in an eternal hell until I started participating in this forum.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

You are conveniently ignoring what THEY did as far as starting the war and killing millions of innocent people.


----------



## DukeGrad (Dec 28, 2003)

*Gentlemen*

Gentlemen

I apologize my friends. I was not thinking in what I was writing. If I hurt anyone, in any way, I am sorry.
I was just writing along, thinking about my father, the war. Well, am sorry.
FrankDC, thank you for pointing that out my friend. You are very good, at finding fault.
No time for you Dear Frank. Last time I talked with you, I waisted half a minute of my precious life.

I am going to enjoy my swim gentlemen. If I offended anyone, I apologize. Lame comment on my part, no thought in writing it.

Nice day my friends.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

WA, I am guilty of lapses in spelling, grammatical errors and not breaking my thoughts into paragraphs for which I take responsibility and hope to remedy with a new computer and much needed review of my old books on style and grammar. Nor would I ever use the false debating strategy of attacking another speaker's message over such mistakes. I do like to think my musings are confined to the subject at hand and carry some degree of cogent thought. Nor are my observations immune to changes over time with greater understanding or revealed fact. But I take exception with your tortured expression of hostility to anyone who doesn't see the world through your corporal inspired discipline of fear and silence. Taking pride in ignorance coupled with rote stupidity puts you in a unique position as runway model for slobwear and slobthink.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

DUKEGRAD, No apology needed. I listen to, and support the Pacifica Foundation, a leftist, liberal media effort that nonetheless provides coverage to issues I would not know of. And every year on the anniversary of the bombings Amy Goodman, nice NYC jewish girl leftist journalist of no mean ability hosts a japanese Hiroshima survivor who spends 15 minutes crying and describing his desire to kill every american he saw for years- while living in the USA. And they bang the log into the bell and light joss sticks and remember that terrible hour. And over here the passing generation has a different view, one not given airtime on Pacifica or as well remembered and understood by their japanese peers holding joss sticks. Yes, we dropped two bombs. We could go into a tit for tat argument of quid pro quo horrors and comment on the rape of Nanking, comfort women, the Bataan Death march or the dropping of disease laden fleas on chinese cities all day. If there is a lesson to glean, which I thought is the end result of reasoned discussion, it is that people and nations get tired. My parent's generation was tired and didn't feel up to another 2-3 years of war against a people embracing national suicide over some cultural concept. So they dropped a bomb probably as little understood in it's implications as the Maxim was in 1914. And this nation may again become tired, not willing to sacrifice anymore sons and daughters against an intractable and suicidal enemy. We may very well do it again. If amadinijad & Co. wish to emulate japanese bushido bound officer's highly successful strategy thats THEIR decision. " War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it."- General William Tecumsa Sherman


----------



## DukeGrad (Dec 28, 2003)

*KAV*

Gentlemen, KAV,

Nicely put KAV. Very nicely put. Thank you again. One thing you mention, is the passing of a beautiful era. This generation is going, we need to better understand this history.

Thank you Kav, do enjoy your comments

Nice day gentlemen


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

Note to all: 

Whatever your feelings, do not transgress the bounds of legality. Threatening the life of a sitting U.S. President is a criminal offense in the United States.


----------



## DukeGrad (Dec 28, 2003)

*Gentlemen*

Gentlemen, AK

AK I see what you mean, in my statement, I meant when the elections come up. I am not happy with the present situation, but am happy to calm the storm until election years.

Have nice day gents and AK, to the gym, then work.
Been fun here


----------



## Martinis at 8 (Apr 14, 2006)

FrankDC said:


> ...
> You know, I never believed in an eternal hell until I started participating in this forum.


So why you still here?


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

DukeGrad said:


> Gentlemen, AK
> 
> AK I see what you mean, in my statement, I meant when the elections come up. I am not happy with the present situation, but am happy to calm the storm until election years.
> 
> ...


DukeGrad,

AK was referring to a now deleted post from another member. He didn't mention his name, so I won't either.


----------

