Did retired General Anthony Zinni really call George W.
Bush's war in Iraq a "brain fart"? That seems to be the case.
But first, some background.
On Thursday night, Zinni, the former commander of the U.S.
Central Command, was interviewed by Ted Koppel on
Nightline. And he was rather sharp in his assessment of
George W. Bush's policy in Iraq. Before the war, Zinni, who
had been an envoy for Bush in the Middle East, opposed a
U.S. invasion of Iraq, arguing that Saddam Hussein did not
pose an imminent threat. On Nightline, Zinni
compared Bush's push for the war with the Gulf of Tonkin
incident--an infamous episode in which President Lyndon
Johnson misrepresented an attack on two U.S. Navy
destroyers in order to win congressional approval of the war
in Vietnam--and he challenged "the credibility behind" Bush's
prewar assertions concerning Iraq's possession of weapons
of mass destruction and its association with anti-American
terrorists. "I'm suggesting," Zinni said, "that either the
[prewar] intelligence was so bad and flawed--and if that's the
case, then somebody's head ought to roll for that--or the
intelligence was exaggerated or twisted in a way to make a
more convenient case to the American people." Zinni said he
believed that Hussein had maintained "the framework for a
weapons of mass destruction program that could be quickly
activated once sanctions were lifted" and that such a
program, while worrisome, did not immediately endanger the
United States.
Zinni raised the issue that Bush might have purposefully
misled the public and not shared with it the true reason for
the war: "If there's a strategic decision for taking down Iraq, if
it's the so-called neoconservative idea that taking apart Iraq
and creating a model democracy, or whatever it is, will
change the equation in the Middle East, then make the
[public] case based on that strategic decision....I think it's a
flawed--like the domino theory--it's a flawed strategic thought
or concept....But if that's the reason for going in, that's the
case the American people ought to hear. They ought to make
their judgment and determine their support based on what
the motivation is for the attack."
Zinni was, in a way, being polite. Earlier in the month, he
addressed a forum sponsored by the U.S. Naval Institute and
the Marine Corps Association. There he let loose. Reflecting
the views of high-ranking U.S. military officials who were
dubious about launching a war against Iraq and skeptical
about the occupation that would follow, Zinni accused the
Bush crowd of having not been ready for the challenges to
come after defeating the Iraqi army. "We're in danger of
failing," he noted, because the Bush administration had not
readied itself for what would follow the initial military
engagement. "We fought one idiot here [in Iraq], just now," he
said. "Ohio State beat Slippery Rock 62 to 0. No shit! You
know! But we weren't ready for that team that came onto the
field at the end of that three-week victory." He went on:
"Right now, in a place like Iraq, you're dealing with Jihadists
that are coming in to raise hell, crime on the streets that's
rampant, ex-Ba'athists that still running around, and the
potential now for this country to fragment: Shi'ia on Shi'ia,
Shi'ia on Sunni, Kurd on Turkomen. It's a powder keg. I just
got back from Jordan. I talked to a number of Iraqis there.
And what I hear scares me even more that what I read in the
newspaper. Resources are needed, a strategy is needed, a
plan. This is a different kind of conflict. War fighting is one
element of it."
Zinni displayed little confidence in Bush and his aides. He
said that their Iraq endeavor has landed the United States
into the middle of assorted "culture wars" in the Middle East.
"We don't understand that culture," he remarked. "I've spent
the last 15 years of my life in this part of the world. And I'll tell
you, every time I hear...one of the dilettantes back here speak
about this region of the world, they don't have a clue. They
don't understand what makes them tick. They don't
understand where they are in their own history. They don't
understand what our role is....We are great at dealing with
the tactical problems--the killing and the breaking. We are
lousy at solving the strategic problems; having a strategic
plan, understanding about regional and global security and
what it takes to weld that and to shape it and to move
forward."
Do you think Zinni is angry over the war? He did get worked
up as he ended his speech:
"We should be...extremely proud of what our people did out
there....It kills me when I hear of the continuing casualties
and the sacrifice that's being made. It also kills me when I
hear someone say that, well, each one of those is a personal
tragedy, but in the overall scheme of things, they're
insignificant statistically." (Perhaps he had in mind the
comment Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld made in
June, when he played down attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq by
saying, "You've got to remember that if Washington, D.C.,
were the size of Baghdad, we would be having something
like 215 murders a month; there's going to be violence in a
big city.") Zinni continued: "When we put [our enlisted men
and women] in harm's way, it had better count for something,
It can't be because some policy wonk back here has a brain
fart of an idea of a strategy that isn't thought out."
Brain fart? That's not quite a military term. But those are
fighting words. And Zinni practically counseled his audience
to rebel against the Bush administration. U.S. troops, he
said, "should never be put on a battlefield without a strategic
plan, not only for the fighting--our generals will take care of
that--but for the aftermath and winning that war. Where are
we, the American people, if we accept this, if we accept this
level of sacrifice without that level of planning? Almost
everyone in this room, of my contemporaries--our feelings
and our sensitivities were forged on the battlefields of
Vietnam, where we heard the garbage and lies, and we saw
the sacrifice. We swore never again would we do that. We
swore never again would we allow it to happen. And I ask
you, is it happening again? And you're going to have to
answer that question, just like the American people are."
Brain fart. Garbage and lies. Never again. This was harsher
rhetoric than Zinni deployed on Nightline, though his
message was essentially the same. With such talk, he is in
sync with Senator Ted Kennedy, who was blasted by
Republicans for calling the war a "fraud." Note to Kennedy
and other critics of the war: Fire away. If a Republican
counter-attacks, you can always reply, at least I didn't say
Bush is asking Americans to give their lives for a war based
on mental flatulence.
COMING SOON: David Corn's new book, The Lies of George W. Bush:
Mastering the Politics of Deception (Crown
Publishers, due out September 30). For more information
and a sample, check out the book's official website: www.bushlies.com.
Copyright © 2003 The Nation
###