If you can't trust republican generals who served in iraq who can you trust?

edited September 2006 in A Moving Train
these are republican generals who were on the ground, leading troops in the current iraq conflict. They are NOT under a court order to be there and they passed up cushy promotions and "retired" so they may speak.

Republican Senators were invited but declined to show up and hear the truth from the mouths of people with real balls.

I'd ike to send a special shout out to "douchebag of the year" Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, a member of the Armed Services Committee for this pearl of wisdom...

"Today's stunt may rile up the liberal base, but it won't kill a single terrorist or prevent a single attack,"

nope, we leave that to bombs. We start listening to people who know what they're talking about...competnce might break out.

choke on it Bushies.



http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-09-25-democrats-rumsfeld-iraq_x.htm

WASHINGTON (AP) — Retired military officers on Monday bluntly accused Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld of bungling the war in Iraq, saying U.S. troops were sent to fight without the best equipment and that critical facts were hidden from the public.
LONG HAUL: 'True believer' is longest-serving defense secretary

"I believe that Secretary Rumsfeld and others in the administration did not tell the American people the truth for fear of losing support for the war in Iraq," retired Maj. Gen. John R. S. Batiste told a forum conducted by Senate Democrats.

A second military leader, retired Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, assessed Rumsfeld as "incompetent strategically, operationally and tactically."

"Mr. Rumsfeld and his immediate team must be replaced or we will see two more years of extraordinarily bad decision-making," Eaton added at the forum, held six weeks before the Nov. 7 midterm elections, in which the war is a central issue.

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, a member of the Armed Services Committee, dismissed the Democratic-sponsored event as "an election-year smoke screen aimed at obscuring the Democrats' dismal record on national security."

"Today's stunt may rile up the liberal base, but it won't kill a single terrorist or prevent a single attack," Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said in a statement. He called Rumsfeld an "excellent secretary of defense."

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, speaking Monday at the National Press Club, said election-season politics may be what's standing in the way of finding a solution to the insurgency in Iraq.

"My instinct is, once the election is over, there will be a lot more hard thinking about what to do about Iraq and a lot more candid observations about it," said Specter, R-Pa.

The conflict, now in its fourth year, has claimed the lives of more than 2,600 American troops and cost more than $300 billion.

Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., the committee chairman, told reporters last week that he hoped the hearing would shed light on the planning and conduct of the war. He said majority Republicans had failed to conduct hearings on the issue, adding, "if they won't ... we will."

Since he spoke, a government-produced National Intelligence Estimate became public that concluded the war has helped create a new generation of Islamic radicalism and that the overall terrorist threat has grown since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Along with several members of the Senate Democratic leadership, one Republican, Rep. Walter Jones of North Carolina, participated. "The American people have a right to know any time that we make a decision to send Americans to die for this country," said Jones, a conservative whose district includes Camp Lejeune Marine base.

It is unusual for retired military officers to criticize the Pentagon while military operations are underway, particularly at a public event likely to draw widespread media attention.

And Senate Republicans circulated a statement by four retired generals that said, "(W)e do not believe that it is appropriate for active duty, or retired, senior military officers to publicly criticize U.S. civilian leadership during war." The group included two three-star generals, John Crosby and Thomas McInerny, and a pair of two-star generals, Burton Moore and Paul Vallely.

But Batiste, Eaton and retired Col. Paul X. Hammes were unsparing in remarks that suggested deep anger at the way the military had been treated. All three served in Iraq, and Batiste also was senior military assistant to then-Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz.

Batiste, who commanded the Army's 1st Infantry Division in Iraq, also blamed Congress for failing to ask "the tough questions."

He said Rumsfeld at one point threatened to fire the next person who mentioned the need for a postwar plan in Iraq.

Batiste said if full consideration had been given to the requirements for war, it's likely the U.S. would have kept its focus on Afghanistan, "not fueled Islamic fundamentalism across the globe, and not created more enemies than there were insurgents."

Hammes said that not providing the best equipment was a "serious moral failure on the part of our leadership."

The United States "did not ask our soldiers to invade France in 1944 with the same armor they trained on in 1941. Why are we asking our soldiers and Marines to use the same armor we found was insufficient in 2003?" he asked.

Hammes was responsible for establishing bases for the Iraqi armed forces. He served in Iraq in 2004 and is now Marine Senior Military Fellow at the Institute for National Security Studies, National Defense University.

Eaton was responsible for training the Iraqi military and later for rebuilding the Iraqi police force.

He said planning for the postwar period was "amateurish at best, incompetent a better descriptor."

Public opinion polls show widespread dissatisfaction with the way the Bush administration has conducted the war in Iraq, but division about how quickly to withdraw U.S. troops. Democrats hope to tap into the anger in November, without being damaged by Republican charges they favor a policy of "cut and run."

By coincidence, the hearing came a day after public disclosure of the National Intelligence Estimate. The report was completed in April and represented a consensus view of the 16 disparate spy services inside government, according to an intelligence official.

Copyright 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • Normally, I would rant on about hating Liberals etc. But I look over to republicans/conservatives/anywhere else and they are just as scathing and hating.

    But I have come to realise there is no point, I know myself that there is never going to be an agreement on one thing, I dont think any less of anyone for having a different opinion, I dont think I ever will.

    The point, is that I can sit here and argue politics until the cows come home, but when I see what I have found, there are so many better things for me to be doing.

    As far as politics goes, I'm out, I'll sit on the fence and watch Government battle it out. My world doesn't change one bit. I dont wanna argue here anymore, it means nothing to me anyway. I'll just give my input here and there.
    no matter where you go,
    there you are.

    - brain of c
  • But I have come to realise there is no point, I know myself that there is never going to be an agreement on one thing, I dont think any less of anyone for having a different opinion, I dont think I ever will.

    How can two sides not agree on facts?

    the war is going badly, to argue that is like saying there's no such thing as gravity. I understand butt licking repubs don't want to look like rats fleeing a ship, but sheesh.
    I'll sit on the fence and watch Government battle it out. My world doesn't change one bit.

    you couldn't be more wrong. It does affect you, it's just a matter of time until it trickles down to you.

    don't worry, I've got your back. I'll wake you when it's over, or time to flee for our lives!
  • How can two sides not agree on facts?

    the war is going badly, to argue that is like saying there's no such thing as gravity. I understand butt licking repubs don't want to look like rats fleeing a ship, but sheesh.



    you couldn't be more wrong. It does affect you, it's just a matter of time until it trickles down to you.

    don't worry, I've got your back. I'll wake you when it's over, or time to flee for our lives!

    Its just how things seem to be here, Liberal Vs Republican or whatever, I've realised that none of it really matters to me, and so I'll just avoid it, wake me when its all over!
    no matter where you go,
    there you are.

    - brain of c
  • Normally, I would rant on about hating Liberals etc. But I look over to republicans/conservatives/anywhere else and they are just as scathing and hating.

    But I have come to realise there is no point, I know myself that there is never going to be an agreement on one thing, I dont think any less of anyone for having a different opinion, I dont think I ever will.

    The point, is that I can sit here and argue politics until the cows come home, but when I see what I have found, there are so many better things for me to be doing.

    As far as politics goes, I'm out, I'll sit on the fence and watch Government battle it out. My world doesn't change one bit. I dont wanna argue here anymore, it means nothing to me anyway. I'll just give my input here and there.

    so you are content to abandon the political process altogether, but bitch about its results?

    you may think there are better things for you to be doing, but that is not true. what's happening right now is more important than anything else. the direction/ fate of the planet depends on you caring.

    but maybe i'm just a crazy liberal you'd like to rant against.
    those undecided, needn't have faith to be free
  • yosi1yosi1 Posts: 3,272
    How can two sides not agree on facts?

    the war is going badly, to argue that is like saying there's no such thing as gravity. I understand butt licking repubs don't want to look like rats fleeing a ship, but sheesh.

    See, I tend to agree with you, but I know people, who are not trying to "lick butt or look better" and actually believe the war is good and going well. These are not uninformed people, they actually know very well whats going on, they just think that its ok for the Bush to lie to the public, for the war to go on for years, and for many, many people to die. They think that the goods of the war out way all of these things. So, its all kind of a matter of whats important, which is subjective, and not really like gravity at all. (Although you may be right in asserting that these people (my friend)) are fucking crazy!)
    you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane.
  • enharmonicenharmonic Posts: 1,917
    I trust the boots on the ground...not the death dealing millionaires who let the beltway cloud their logic. Politics don't win wars.

    Anyone not listening to these experts on war should be taken out back and fucked in the mouth with an M-60.

    Yeah..."hard thinking"...that's what the troops need. Tell ya what...why don't we move Congress into the theatre of operations in Iraq...and let them do some hard thinking while their asses are on the line?
  • As far as politics goes, I'm out, I'll sit on the fence and watch Government battle it out. My world doesn't change one bit. I dont wanna argue here anymore, it means nothing to me anyway. I'll just give my input here and there.

    don't think that your world not changing isn't completely contrived. those in power right now know that the american people would not back the actions being performed in our name if these actions actually affected the average american...and by average i don't mean your neighbor that lost a son, daughter, wife, or husband to the war...rather, i mean most americans that haven't had this misfortune and tragedy bestowed upon them.

    in the wars of past, the entirety of america was asked to sacrifice to support the war...these were times when americans supported the actions of those in power...so there was no need to hide the truth or herd into complacency the populace. compare what the average american from 1939 to 1945 was asked to sacrifice for WWII with what the average american today is asked to sacrifice and you'll note that the sacrifices of the former outweigh the latter on a scale of about 100 to 1 (i'll admit that this is a meaningless/baseless statistic that is not founded in specifics, rather from observation and comparison).

    this was one of the main points of the video i submitted for the 10c video contest...i'm not certain that too many people got that...but i know of at least one astute pearl jam fan that did...she goes by the name murphyjesus on this here board...she's canadian.

    ds
    And no one sings me lullabyes
    And no one makes me close my eyes
    So I throw the windows wide
    And call to you across the sky....
  • enharmonic wrote:
    taken out back and fucked in the mouth with an M-60.

    ouch! (totally agree BTW)
  • enharmonic wrote:
    I trust the boots on the ground...not the death dealing millionaires who let the beltway cloud their logic. Politics don't win wars.

    Anyone not listening to these experts on war should be taken out back and fucked in the mouth with an M-60.

    Yeah..."hard thinking"...that's what the troops need. Tell ya what...why don't we move Congress into the theatre of operations in Iraq...and let them do some hard thinking while their asses are on the line?

    now you're just being silly ;)

    white men dictating wars behind closed doors is the very essence of America.
    those undecided, needn't have faith to be free
  • enharmonicenharmonic Posts: 1,917
    ouch! (totally agree BTW)

    That would be quite the sound bite wouldn't it? Damn, I wish I were a rock and roll star so i could shoot my mouth off like Bono or something...only I'd say really offensive things like this :D
Sign In or Register to comment.