|
|
| |
Why Iraq Was a Mistake (FULL ARTICLE)
By Lt. General Gregory Newbold, April 9, 2006, Time Magazine
(Retired director of operations at the Pentagon's military joint staff.)
[condensed by zFacts]
... I was a witness and therefore a party to the actions that led us to the invasion of Iraq--an unnecessary war. Inside the military family, I made no secret of my view that the zealots' rationale for war made no sense. ... But I now regret that I did not more openly challenge those who were determined to invade a country whose actions were peripheral to the real threat--al-Qaeda. I retired from the military four months before the invasion, in part because of my opposition to those who had used 9/11's tragedy to hijack our security policy. Until now, I have resisted speaking out in public. I've been silent long enough.
... I have been both inspired and shaken by the broken bodies but unbroken spirits of soldiers, Marines and corpsmen returning from this war. The cost of flawed leadership continues to be paid in blood.
....
Let me make clear--I am not opposed to war. I would gladly have traded my general's stars for a captain's bars to lead our troops into Afghanistan to destroy the Taliban and al-Qaeda. ... My view--at the moment--is that a precipitous withdrawal would be a mistake. ... If, however, the Iraqis prove unable to govern, and there is open civil war, then I am prepared to change my position.
My deep affection and respect are for those who volunteer to serve our nation.... Our country has never been served by a more competent and professional military. For that reason, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's recent statement that "we" made the "right strategic decisions" but made thousands of "tactical errors" is an outrage. It reflects an effort to obscure gross errors in strategy ... Our forces are successful in spite of the strategic guidance they receive, not because of it.
We are living with the consequences of successive policy failures. ...
[1] Distortion of intelligence in the buildup to the war
[2] Micromanagement kept our forces from having enough resources to do the job
[3] Failure to retain and reconstitute the Iraqi military to help quell civil disorder
[4] Initial denial that an insurgency was the heart of the opposition to occupation
[5] Alienation of allies who could have helped in a more robust way to rebuild Iraq
My sincere view is that the commitment of our forces to this fight was done with a casualness and swagger that are the special province of those who have never had to execute these missions--or bury the results.
Flaws in our civilians are one thing; the failure of the Pentagon's military leaders is quite another. ... When they knew the plan was flawed, saw intelligence distorted to justify a rationale for war, or witnessed arrogant micromanagement..., many leaders who wore the uniform chose inaction. ... The consequence was that a fundamentally flawed plan was executed for an invented war, while pursuing the real enemy, al-Qaeda, became a secondary effort.
....
To be sure, the Bush Administration and senior military officials are not alone in their culpability. Members of Congress--from both parties--defaulted ... Many in the media saw the warning signs and ... These are the same news organizations that now downplay both the heroic and the constructive in Iraq.
So what is to be done? We need fresh ideas and fresh faces. That means, as a first step, replacing Rumsfeld and many others unwilling to fundamentally change their approach. The troops in the Middle East have performed their duty. ... It is time to send a signal to our nation, our forces and the world that we are uncompromising on our security but are prepared to rethink how we achieve it. It is time for senior military leaders to discard caution in expressing their views and ensure that the President hears them clearly. And that we won't be fooled again.
|
|
http://zfacts.com/p/294.html | 01/18/12 07:26 GMT
Modified: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 22:03:39 GMT
|
|
