E-MAIL THIS LINK
To: 

Brit General Blasts American Policy
LONDON (AFP) - The head of the British Army during the 2003 invasion of Iraq has launched a fierce attack on the United States over its running of the troubled country since, a newspaper reported Saturday. General Sir Mike Jackson branded US post-invasion policy "intellectually bankrupt" and said its then defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, was "one of the most responsible for the current situation in Iraq."
Old news.
Wrong news.
The retired chief of the general staff added that the US's wider approach to tackling global terrorism is "inadequate" because it places too much emphasis on military power at the expense of nation-building and diplomacy.
More old news. Does this guy know Petreaus is in charge?
He doesn't care.
Britain's Foreign Secretary David Miliband and Defence Secretary Des Browne wrote a joint article in the Washington Post Friday saying it was "time to set the record straight" after weeks of "misplaced criticism". "The question some people have asked is: have British forces failed in Basra? The answer is no," they added. "We believe we remain on track to complete the return of full sovereignty to the Iraqi people as planned. The United Kingdom is sticking to the mission we took on four years ago."

Like Miliband and Browne, Jackson defended the record of Britain's military in Basra, Iraq's second city, in comments published in the Daily Telegraph, which is about to serialise his forthcoming autobiography, "Soldier."

He rejected any suggestion that British forces in the south had failed. "I don't think that's a fair assessment at all," Jackson said. "What has happened in the south, as throughout the rest of Iraq, was that primary responsibility for security would be handed to the Iraqis once the Iraqi authorities and the coalition were satisfied that their state of training and development was appropriate.

"In the south we had responsibility for four provinces. Three of these have been handed over in accordance with that strategy. It remains just in Basra for that to happen."

Jackson attacked the decision to hand control of planning the post-invasion administration of Iraq to the Pentagon. All the planning carried out by the State Department had "gone to waste," he argued.
Ohhhh...toooo bad!
He added that disbanding the Iraqi army and security forces after toppling Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein was "very short-sighted. "We should have kept the Iraqi security services in being and put them under the command of the coalition," he said.
And that's the end of the 'story'. I only editied out some background.
Posted by: Bobby 2007-09-01
http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=197743