EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
- Disaster Capitalism Strikes as Hedge Funds Circle Near-Bankrupt Municipalities Like Vultures
- Ignoring Bee Crisis, EPA Greenlights New 'Highly Toxic' Pesticide
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
- In 'March Toward Disaster,' World Hits 400 PPM Milestone
- Ignoring Bee Crisis, EPA Greenlights New 'Highly Toxic' Pesticide
Popular content
Today's Top News
Ex-Commander Says Iraq Effort Is 'a Nightmare'
WASHINGTON - In a sweeping indictment of the four-year effort in Iraq, the former top commander of American forces there called the Bush administration's handling of the war "incompetent" and said the result was "a nightmare with no end in sight."
Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, who retired in 2006 after being replaced in Iraq after the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal, blamed the Bush administration for a "catastrophically flawed, unrealistically optimistic war plan" and denounced the current addition of American forces as a "desperate" move that would not achieve long-term stability.
"After more than four years of fighting, America continues its desperate struggle in Iraq without any concerted effort to devise a strategy that will achieve victory in that war-torn country or in the greater conflict against extremism," General Sanchez said at a gathering of military reporters and editors in Arlington, Va.
He is the most senior war commander of a string of retired officers who have harshly criticized the administration's conduct of the war. While much of the previous condemnation has been focused on the role of former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, General Sanchez's was an unusually broad attack on the overall course of the war.
But his own role as commander in Iraq during the Abu Ghraib scandal leaves him vulnerable to criticism that he is shifting the blame from himself to the administration that ultimately replaced him and declined to nominate him for a fourth star, forcing his retirement.
Though he was cleared of wrongdoing in the abuses after an inquiry by the Army's inspector general, General Sanchez became a symbol - with civilian officials like L. Paul Bremer III, the head of the Coalition Provisional Authority - of ineffective American leadership early in the occupation.
General Sanchez said he was convinced that the American effort in Iraq was failing the day after he took command, in June 2003. Asked why he waited until nearly a year after his retirement to voice his concerns publicly, he responded that it was not the place of active-duty officers to challenge lawful orders from the civilian authorities.
General Sanchez, who is said to be considering writing a book, promised further public statements criticizing officials by name.
"There has been a glaring and unfortunate display of incompetent strategic leadership within our national leaders," he said, adding that civilian officials have been "derelict in their duties" and guilty of a "lust for power."
White House officials would not comment directly on General Sanchez's remarks. "We appreciate his service to the country," said Kate Starr, a White House spokeswoman.
She noted that Gen. David H. Petraeus, the current top commander in Iraq, and Ryan C. Crocker, the American ambassador to Baghdad, said in their testimony to Congress last month that "there's more work to be done, but progress is being made in Iraq. And that's what we're focused on now."
General Sanchez has been criticized by some current and retired officers for failing to recognize the growing insurgency in Iraq during his year in command and for failing to put together a plan to unify the disparate military effort, a task that was finally carried out when his successor, Gen. George W. Casey Jr., took over in mid-2004.
General Sanchez included the military and himself among those who made mistakes in Iraq, citing a failure by top commanders to insist on a better post-invasion stabilization plan. He offered a tepid compliment to General Petraeus. The general, he said, could use American troops to gain time in Iraq but could not achieve lasting results.
Michael E. O'Hanlon, a military analyst at the Brookings Institution, criticized General Sanchez for implying in his speech that the current military strategy of relying on additional troops and on protecting the Iraqi people is little different than the strategy employed when he was in command.
Noting that calls by members of Congress for troops were rebuffed by the Bush administration in 2003, Mr. O'Hanlon said, "Sanchez was one of the top military people who condoned that, if not directly, then by his silence."
General Sanchez's main criticism was leveled at the Bush administration, which he said failed to mobilize the entire United States government, not just the military, to contribute meaningfully to reconstructing and stabilizing Iraq.
"National leadership continues to believe that victory can be achieved by military power alone," he said. "Continued manipulations and adjustments to our military strategy will not achieve victory. The best we can do with this flawed approach is stave off defeat."
Asked after his remarks what strategy he favored, General Sanchez ticked off a series of steps-from promoting reconciliation among Iraq's warring sectarian factions to building effective Iraqi army and police units - that closely paralleled the list of tasks frequently cited by the Bush administration as the pillars of the current strategy.
General Sanchez, now a Pentagon consultant who trains active-duty generals, said the administration's biggest failure had been its lack of a detailed strategy for achieving those steps and "synchronizing" the military and civilian contributions.
"The administration, Congress and the entire inter-agency, especially the State Department, must shoulder responsibility for the catastrophic failure, and the American people must hold them accountable," he said.
His talk on Friday at the annual convention of the Military Reporters and Editors Association was not the first time that General Sanchez has been critical of the administration.
He said in an interview in June with Agence France-Presse that the best the United States could achieve in Iraq would be stalemate. And he drew a standing ovation at a gathering of veterans last month when he argued that the country's problems in Iraq were the result of a "crisis in national political leadership."
Though General Sanchez remained on active duty after leaving Iraq in 2004, he never received a fourth star, in part because, though he was popular with Mr. Rumsfeld, the Bush administration feared that his nomination hearings in the Senate would turn into a bitter partisan fight and a public replay of the details of the Abu Ghraib scandal.
© 2007 The New York Times
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

44 Comments so far
Show All[quote]the former top commander of American forces there called the Bush administration's handling of the war "incompetent"[/quote]
That depends on what you believe the mission was in the first place.
Somehow I doubt that, when Bush proclaimed 'mission accomplished', it had anything to do with what most of the US military seems to perceive as being its primary objectives. As just one minor example, consider how many Iraqi weapons caches were left unattended while the Iraq Oil Ministry was zealously guarded.
Incompetence, or merely a true reflection of the real priorities? I'm inclined to believe that it's more the latter than the former and that the US military is almost as blind to the truth of their own role as ordinary USans seem to be.
"General Sanchez's main criticism was leveled at the Bush administration, which he said failed to mobilize the entire United States government, not just the military, to contribute meaningfully to reconstructing and stabilizing Iraq."
For ALL his criticisms it boils down to NOT LEAVING Iraq and saying that the whole government needed to be on board in launching the war? Give me a break. War criminals: prosecute them all. I hope someday, perhaps after the fall of the empire, these guys go on trial, just like the Nazis after WW2.
'Limited Hangout' is what I call this. It is perfect for those who want to complain while at the same time 'stay the course' in Iraq.
I read this on CNN, I was hoping not to see it on Common Dreams.
To think that the generals' criticism of the present administration is disconnected from policy is to be naive. The USA is headed for disaster and the current administration is eager to lose the next phony election so that their second team can take over for a term while the animosity against the first team settles. The tried and true tactic has always worked for them before, but this time is different. This time the true nature of the USA is known to the whole world and the only people they are able to deceive are their own citizens.
The only country on this planet which is a real friend to the USA is Israel, which emulates the US's genocidal tactics against the indigenous americans as a way to wrench the land from the Palestinians, and all of the other countries of the world will abandon the USA when the collapse comes. The rats always know first when it is time to abandon ship.
The worldwide hatred of the USA is not due to "cable TV" and other worldly goods such as some moronic commentators have suggested, but to the constant atrocities such as, but not beginning with, the millions killed in the Philippines, the several million killed in Korea, the three or four million killed in Vietnam and what's going on now in Iraq. Plus all of the dirty little wars in Central and South America and Africa, where the USA was a strong supporter of the apartheid regime in South Africa as well as of the worst dictators imaginable. It is a general rule that if the USA supported someone then it was pretty much guaranteed they were evil and reprehensible and if the USA was against someone it was because they had good qualities.
The strength of the USA in the world is an illusion. The money they print is just paper which is backed by nothing and the government bonds are an investment in a future that will not materialize so that the USA financial system will burst like the flimsy bubbles of other speculative ventures in recent history. The World Bank and the IMF have been investing tens of billions of dollars into the high end of the US economy in order to give it the illusion of robustness, now that those organizations are flush with cash after having been paid off and having been rejected by many countries, but that only makes the economy top heavy and does nothing for the bedrock. Recent prognostications by prominent economists that there is a 50/50 chance of a recession in the USA is a veiled warning of what all of their kind know is really coming, and that can only be described as a total collapse of a corrupt system which does not have a sturdy foundation which would enable them to weather the coming difficulties.
Added to the USA's flimsy societal structure is the repositioning of the meridonal weather patterns which have shifted to the north and which are drying out the USA while their opposite number will increasingly moisten central Africa. This dangerous pattern is also something that the corporate media does not report on in a meaningful way but it is responsible for the recent unprecedented spike in the price of wheat and other grains as the traditional growing areas dry. The US's pipedream of making fuel from food as a viable alternative to a dependance on foreign oil will soon be exposed as just another idiotic plan from a government of simpleminded people who should never have been allowed to manage a small town, let alone a populous nation. With the reserve stocks of grains currently at their lowest levels in thirty years and with a disastrous harvest this year, the near future is going to be catastrophic for the US when it is found that the world market is saturated with what they produce best, which is weapons, and their paper money is increasingly worth less.
When the tens of millions in the USA become hungry, then we'll likely hear some honest voices speaking truth and the corrupt system of the free market economy, which retards societal and scientific progress in a real and substantial way, by distorting priorities, can be recognized as the bastion of criminal consortiums which it is, and then it can be discarded and be replaced with a system that is equitable and moral.
Does anyone remember the connection between Abu Graib (sp) and Sanchez? And the circumstances of his "retirement"? What is he covering up now?
He's uncovering. Do you really believe the blame for the atocities at Abu Graib only went as far as Sanchez?
"Sanchez was commander of coalition forces during the period when abuse of prisoners occurred at Abu Ghraib and at other locations. On May 5, 2006 Sanchez denied ever authorizing interrogators to "go to the outer limits". Sanchez said he had told interrogators: "...we should be conducting our interrogations to the limits of our authority." Sanchez called the ACLU: "...a bunch of sensationalist liars, I mean lawyers, that will distort any and all information that they get to draw attention to their positions.""
Generals have either retired early in disgust or, like Shinseki and Sanchez, been removed. If Petraeus thinks he can escape a similar fate, he's kidding himself. He should just quit right now and speak out -- or settle for being tainted by this fiasco for the rest of his career.
People should ask themselves whether they want people like Sanchez, others in the military and various politicians to change their outlook on this war? Sanchez spoke out and some act as if he shouldn't because he didn't do it before? He sees things differently now. Isn't that what we strive for? Would they rather he hadn't had a change of position or remained silent?
We need people of his rank and credibility to speak up. Whenever they see the light. Don't think this was easy or of no importance for him to have done so. I don't care that he chose to do it now.
It is only after the war is over and all is said and done ...then I would reject people who have only then chosen to 'speak out' after it is over. The war rages on and that matters... nothing else.
Thank you General Sanchez for speaking out while it matters. There are so many who do not.
Let's keep the facts straight. Ricardo Sanchez is a criminal. (A war criminal if that's more suitable) So we have a war criminal critizing other war criminals for screwing things up, sort a perverse blame game over a hulking pile of dead bodies. You see Biden doing the same thing: " War is glorious, Bush messed it all up. "
To The Editor:
As a citizen of the Reich, I am increasingly concerned about the mismanagement of the Second World War. After the takeover of Czechoslovakia, which we all supported, the war seemed to take a wrong turn. The invasions of Poland and France were carried out brilliantly, but there was no coherent plan for the occupation. Disbanding the Polish Army and attempting to impose the philosophy of National Socialism on the unwilling French were strategic blunders which fueled the insurgency. Now I hear rumors of a possible war with Russia. Sheer madness!
We must also do much better at public diplomacy. Too many people in foreign countries believe that Germany is an aggressive nation. Their press constantly repeat distortions and misinformation about our actual policies and aims. We need to do more to correct the falsehoods, but we must also recognize that our own mistakes, including treatment of concentration camp inmates bordering on torture, has contributed to these misperceptions. Overzealousness in the war against Jewish treachery has led to excesses which have besmirched the good name of the Fatherland. We must do better.
A Concerned Hamburger
I just have to say Nader2000 that your piece was nicely done. I'm not sure that it was apt considering the article but it was very good.
well,i hope the reason he is saying something now,is because he just retired,yesterday.......and not because he just noticed,yesterday....nightmare,unfortunately is one of the few descriptive words we can use to describe iraq....but it is woefully inadequate.call it what it is=horrifying genocide.
Brigadier General Janice Karpinski went down for Abu Ghraib and was demoted to Colonel, even though she was systematically kept out of the loop, while Sanchez and Major General Geoffrey Miller dodged responsibility for their operations in a classic CYA move.
Private contractors were involved, dontchaknow.
So who gives a shit if this weasel Sanchez wants to jump on the bandwagon of righteousness? He'd still fuck your mother, given the opportunity.
I think I've come to the conclusion that *The State is the Enemy of the People* - as they only ever seem to act in their own interests, not in the interests of the *ordinary People* (of this world).
Given all that, it's little surprise that some people now wish to act as Enemies of the State, and will continue to feel that way, up until the day when the State stops treating us, (-the ordinary people of the world) like their gullible slaves and Enemies.
Giant signs needs to be hung on the sides of The Grey House, the Pentagon -and other government buildings right across the world, reading: "OUT OF ORDER!!"
The cretinous crew at the Top have lost sight of their *PRIMARY* duty, ~ which is to protect and enhance all life on planet Earth.
**That is both their (and our) duty as human beings.**
Our leaders (-in uniform or not) have become lost in a swirling miasma of mickey-mouse dreams of grandeur, illusion, fictions, self-awarded opulence, and flag-waving, aggressive gun-toting cowboyisms which are as risible as they are dangerous.
We The People must try our level best to lead them safely into rest homes where they can spend the rest of their demented days poking each other in the eye with pointed sticks, -whilst the rest of us get on with repairing international human relationships and the fabric of the planet which they (and their corporate pals) have so seriously damaged...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Maybe that's what is at the bottom of this whole fiasco of totally errant governments?
--Maybe this is a massive wake-up all?
Maybe it's the dawning of a New Era in human history wherein We the People finally wake up from our sleep of ages, and realise that the clowns at the top have been fooling us all along, but now we are due to wrest power away from them, and never again entrust power to such charlatans, cheats, liars, cowards and thieves?
If that be the case, then, -after all the dust has settled- we could be on the brink of a much brighter, safer future for our race...
zoya October 13th, 2007 4:13 pm wrote:
"Generals have either retired early in disgust or, like Shinseki and Sanchez, been removed. If Petraeus thinks he can escape a similar fate, he's kidding himself. He should just quit right now and speak out — or settle for being tainted by this fiasco for the rest of his career."
A least he has some congressional proclamations decreeing his "honor". He must be so proud. None of these characters will suffer any more than their ego's being hurt; otherwise, they're set for life. Maybe congress can proclaim the true meaning of honor, that would be funny to read.
Sanchez is jumping on the bandwagon while theres still room.
Just saw Christopher Hitchens today at the Freedom Freedom From Religion Foundation annual meeting in Madison, WI and while he delivered a well deserved pasting to religion, he also spoke very absurdly about Iraq.
Would Sanchez please straighten the irrational Hitch out?
The military are telling us that they need new political leadership, but most all of us on CD feel that the MSM only allows the incompetent corporate/crooked-class through the MSM sieve. We have a chicken-egg problem.
If George Washington were alive, the first thing he'd probably do is order a branch of the military to take out the MSM. Then he'd order clean elections, to be monitored by the townspeople in every precinct, pitchfork in hand.
Not all of us would necessarily be happy, but none of us would doubt that democracy had been served.
From the article "Asked why he waited until nearly a year after his retirement to voice his concerns publically, he responded that it was not the place of active duty officers to challenge the lawful orders from civilian authorities."
So we can assume that he still believes that the audacious invasion of a non threatening nation was legal, that the murder of thousands and now maybe millions was legal, that plundering the resources of a sovereign nation was legal, just MISMANAGED. He's still a war criminal.
BugsBBunny, I admire your continued optimism and forgiving nature but this guy is not contrite or indicating any sorrow for being part of unleashing the horrors of war upon the innocent. He's just complaining about mismangement, from the civilian authorities, as if to imply that if the military guys had the go ahead they could of managed this invasion with greater "kill accuracy", (my quotes),
AND he is not even recommending getting out now, just sittting there saying "jeez what a mess". Such insight! Let's honor this brave man coming forward and admitting what the entire world has known from day one of this unlawful invasion.
Anyone who criticizes the mismanagement or the conduct of the war is still a criminal warmonger and is in delusion. How can anyone sanitize and properly conduct an immoral war based on lies? This is similar to one of the bank robbers explaining why it was botched and how it could be done better.
Anyone who believes Sanchez was responsible for Abu Graib isn't living in the real world. I am certain the orders for the treatment of prisoners came from the very top Bush! He has run the show from day one and don't make the mistake of kidding yourselves he doesn't. It was his idea to have private contractors, not the proper gear for GI's (after all where was the need they were going to be greeted with flowers), no-bid contracts and etc. The buck stops at the very top of the White House for the mismanagement, crimes and deceit! I watched the whole administration on television lying through their teeth. It was sickening what they were doing to this country. But, most like me were only batting our heads against a brick wall trying to tell people it was lies. That Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11 and as far as UN inspectors were concerned their were no weapons of mass destruction. That isn't what the public wanted to hear and believe. So they closed their ears to the warnings and looked at people like me like we were a traitor. They kept repeating the same set of lies Bush was telling. Most could care less we were attacking a country who was no threat to us. I was actually told this once. I asked the woman if she thought we should jump on the country who was no threat to us she stuttered and stammered for a while. But, an hour later she was telling everyone in the office they killed '3000 of our people'! It did literally no good to tell the truth. The country was in the 'war mode' because they were whipped there by Bush! He used his exalted office as President to deceive an entire country. People wanted to jump on anything and everything that moved. So finally I shut up and let what happened...happen. There was literally nothing I could do about it. Because a lot of us tried. No one cared to listen.
A little bit of honesty now and then is refreshing.
It's a nightmare for all good people, and a dream come true for a handful of sick and greedy bastards.
if i could correct one thing from my previous post: let me say it this way: "who cares about an individual's specific past......"
i understand that "if the truth coming out" is "the truth about the past", then by all means, let it out for the good of us all.....i doubt there will be complete agreement, but at least it will be on the table of discussion.....
Peace,
Ken Hausle
I think it took courage for General Sanchez to speak up. At this moment, who cares about the past --- what matters now is the truth. And any effort to get the truth out seems worthwhile to me.
Peace,
Ken Hausle
When will the US own up to it's military problem? When we're bombed and invaded? Sanchez was directly responsible for death, destruction and murder, it's never reported that way and never will be. He's a war criminal in an unbiased court with a jury of dead civilians. He, and a number of others, would be in jail now if this country had any sense of morality.
When it is widely known,
The truth will set us free
forever from corrupt politicians and the war, poverty and other forms of needless misery that are created as a result of their incompetence
The current state of world affairs:
The other nations are scrambling to put together alliances that will take down the USA economically.
Global warming is not as important, in terms of suffering, as ending this insane painful domination of most of the world by the oligarchs centered in, but not limited to, the USA, although we are their mercenaries. And your part in this, gentle reader?
Cut your consumption, both to help destroy the corporate consumerist system, and to prepare yourself for the pain of being really really poor.
The rich won't suffer much, beyond a few limits on their travel and more ridiculous status items, we peons are going to suffer plenty. Get ready for the war of all against all.
That's the choice they've driven into, and they meant to.
Or you can burn down your local superrich enclave, as an alternative.
The Bushes have, of course, bought a few hundred thousand acres in Paraguay.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1928928,00.html
ormondotvos - how can you say "the rich won't suffer much".
Have you got some sort of inside info. Otherwise, this is nothing but speculation, and i'd argue the exact opposite....
Ken Hausle
Charlotte, NC
Remember the Nuremburg trials at which the judgment of the court was: "Just following orders" as an excuse for doing dispicable things is NOT AN EXCUSE.
There still has not been enough coverage of Admiral William Fallon's statements in the major media.
When one Googles his name, one soon surmises that the Bush administration
didn't know what it was getting when it
appointed him CENTCOM head, which makes
him among other things the vaunted General
Petraeus's senior.
Fallon holds the opposite viewpoint as to what we should do in Iraq (get out!), and
has been a conciliator when it comes to Iran.
He is pretty well known-- just not well known enough outside of the Pentagon-- for telling Petraeus during their first meeting in Baghdad last March, that he considered him to be "an ass-kissing little chickenshit" and added, "I hate people like that", sources from inside the Pentagon said. That remark reportedly came after Petraeus began the meeting by making remarks that Fallon interpreted as trying to ingratiate himself with a superior.
Fallon also has stated to columnist David
Ignatius that we don't have time for reconciliations in Iraq...in other words that there is urgency for us to get out,
that the situation is worsening, tending toward all kinds of even more miserable scenarios, even doomsday ones.
Media coverage doesn't follow up on stuff like this. It is unbalanced as usual. It's more apt to present grim scenarios
of what absolutely must happen if we withdraw with decision and abruptness.
"I just have to say Nader2000 that your piece was nicely done. I'm not sure that it was apt considering the article but it was very good..."
What? Nader2000's piece was a perfectly apt critique of the article. All this general is saying is that he disagrees with the strategy and tactics of a vile crime against humanity. Would he rather the crime have been pulled off successfully?
PJD, "Would he rather the crime have been pulled off successfully?"
Yes, that is exactly what he is saying, along with many others who "appear" to be coming to their senses. The invasion was immoral, illegal, and a crime against humanity right from the start (even Clintons' sanctions were immoral).
I have nothing but contempt for war mongering polititions, military leaders, and a complicite media. All are responsible for this murderous atrocity and should be prosecuted. Admitting the mistake now does not get him off the hook, especially since he is just saying that the handling of the war was "incompetant" instead of immoral.
PJD and rebelnow - what you say above makes sense, but would we rather he just have kept quiet and not said anything? I don't think so, and i do think speaking up early should be taken into consideration when "scale" of offense (or lack thereof as the case may be) is considered.
I'm happy he spoke up to at least state the obvious - "we have a nightmare on our hands". The more military folks who speak up (and act accordingly) in an attempt to "regain some honor" the better. At least it seems that way to me, but hell i could be wrong.
Peace,
Ken Hausle
Plus, has anyone here said that anybody else gets a "out of jail card" just because they speak up. I haven't read everything here so maybe i missed it, but this griping about folks who are at least attempting to communicate about the situation (especially when they are not yet being compelled to) smacks of some incredibly deep bitterness...almost as if no matter what anyone does it will be unsatisfactory and due derisiveness....
Come on. Let the "flawless one" cast the first stone....
Ken Hausle
Ken,
The problem is not that the generals argument is flawed or imperfect, rather the problem is that it is totally wrong.
Wrong criticism can be worse than no criticism. Because th most obvious response to the generals criticism would be to simply put everyone in the country to death by nuclear or other means.
We are in this situation today because our last great imperialist adventure, Vietnam, was likely simply called a "blunder" or "mistake" rather than a crime, so we left everything in place to do it again.
Ken, I don't have the time now to respond in greater depth but, to me there is a huge difference between calling a criminal act "mishandled' vs calling it a criminal act. Regretting that you botched a robbery is not the same as saying I'm a robber, guilty as charged.
As I wrote earlier Sanchez is NOT regretting being a part of the illegal invasion only that it was mishandled. These guys seem to be jumping ship, while it's on it's way down, as they yell "It's not my fault, it's the Captains!".
PJD - I agree we need to start calling a spade a spade, but i don't think we will ever get there if more and more folks don't continue to take action as best they can and attempt to "come clean". General Sanchez may not be innocent with respect to the Iraq "murder for oil" campaign, but at least he is doing something more than nothing, and that is better than nothing ain't it? Furthermore, just because he may be obfuscating with respect to what needs to be done provides no absolvement from his role and responsibility in the whole dismal affair. At least he is acknowledging there is a problem, and i hope that each step towards honestly acknowledging mistakes is a step closer to the truth of the matter -- which is what we need to approach if we ever want justice.
As an aside, most of us here i think recognize that this whole situation in Iraq has been just another imperialistic resource grab with all of the grisly and unacceptable suffering of innocence that always accompanies such offensive action. Yet it is all sort of bizarre and ironic in a way that our "disrespect" for and addiction to combusting old carbon-based life (oil as well as coal) is now coming back to "haunt us" in the form of ecological collapse in so many ways. It is almost as if this old life is telling us that "modern society" has totally lost connection with life in general as evidenced by our continued callous collection and combustion of the old life. This old life ought be considered a precious resource to only be used on a small-scale and in an ecological reverent manner, and to be "banked away" for future generations who most likely will better know how to use this gift from the earth and who will almost definitely need it more than we do.
Regardless, let me say again that i agree - if this nightmare comes to an end, then much will need to be changed to prevent a future recurrence.....
Peace,
Ken Hausle
Charlotte, NC
rebelnow - i agree with what you say, but to put myself in the general's shoes, i can also imagine how hard it would be to come out publically with the cold reality of what has transpired and what continue to occur. There are just too many damn lawyers these days (especially is the US) and now everyone is constantly trying to cover their butts rather than telling it like it is.
Even so, as each tidbit emerges then the momentum can continue and the more the momentum continues the bigger the tidbits can be......because suddenly coming out with the truth will be "the proper thing to do". Wishful thinking on my part perhaps, but nonetheless it offers a possibility of "relatiavely peaceful transition" to something better, and i don't see too many offers of this lately....
Peace,
Ken Hausle
Charlotte, NC
Follow the money, General. You got used. The political leadership used the Armed Forces of the People of the US to make a play for easy oil. Either way it worked out was money for them--them being the oiligarchy. You were given illegal orders.
One of the things that really needs to be ironed out is- at what level of command is the determination made that an order is illegal, i.e. not consistant with the word and spirit of your oath of commission.
The "political ldrsp" is engaged in commercial empire building and cares not about the death on either end of the guns. The Chiefs should have seen that, as well as any flag officer, and acted accordingly.
School yourself on some Chomsky, Chalmers Johnson, Korten, Palast, Zinn, Hartmann, Hawken for starters, and , this website.
Now, folks, how can we get these comments and articles to these guys?
As horrid as it may be, Me thinks that failure in Iraq is intentional. Failure IS the goal. Disorder and constant warfare are the characteristics of success and desired by Washington. This prolongs our occupation (with endless financial benefits for a select few) which while aggravating social and political problems, it can basically be handled through the media, a bit of arm-twisting, bribery - and the status quo is maintained.
So, as good as we may feel reading Sanchez's confessional remarks, it, to me, indicates successful management and confirmation of the goal of a never-ending, destabilized country. To Bush's Washington, a weak, divided, powerless country is far preferable to a stable, oil-rich country which would, if it could determine the production goals and price of oil on the market.
What a miserable, miserable world...
"There has been a glaring and unfortunate display of incompetent strategic leadership within our national leaders," he said, adding that civilian officials have been "derelict in their duties" and guilty of a "lust for power."
"General Sanchez, who is said to be considering writing a book, promised further public statements criticizing officials by name."
Cholera's spreading, DU's glowing, Bush is still smirking(murderously) and Cheney scowling(murderously) - get with it Sanchez!
Name names - help impeach!
plenum October 15th, 2007 2:32 am wrote:
"...What a miserable, miserable world…"
witht miserable leaders.
Personally I think it's a beautiful world that is in constant threat of being messed with by greedy leaders. This planet will live on long after humans destroy each other. It doesn't need us.
I appreciate the thoughtfulness of the postings here on this. There are alot of ways to looking at this "coming out" with the truth, and they are all to be considered carefully.
But, at bottom, we must keep the impeachment pressure on. What the oligarphs, with alfred newman at their head, have done is truly a crime. To the Iraqis, killed, displaced, to the soldiers for being pawns, to the Americans who were whipped into a frenzy in a propaganda blitz that was rivalled in effectiveness only by that conducted under the Third Reich.
We need to keep the impeachment pressure on. Every time someone comes out with "incompetence" (which pales in definition to their real crimes) we pressure to impeach on "incompetence". If it's the straw we're handed, let's use it.