Article

2007-01-04 Iraq

John Podhoretz: SMART, but WRONG, why W 's firing Gen. Casey

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Wuzzalib 2007-01-04 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11133 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Podhoretz gives a take not too different from my rather heated comments on the NYT story (which was ruined by my inability to preview, and the BOLDING of half the annotated article). His metaphor of the burning building was more succinct than anything I came up with. As I said in the earlier post, I just can't understand how MNF-I and their civilian masters ever thought that 2006 was a time for a sudden hand-over to Iraqis. The elections were great achievements and milestones - which needed to be exploited with a ruthless suppression of Sunni resistance, followed by a similar though narrower effort against the Mahdi army and major criminal gangs. Instead, it was simply assumed that political developments would nearly instantly gut the insurgency and the terrorists. And on top of this, the American public was left to figure things out for itself (with the help of NPR, Reuters, and Democratic legislators), while the administration barely issued anything more than limp slogans.

They assumed a democracy where that wasn't yet one, while ignoring a democracy that did exist and provided resources, people, and consent for the entire effort.

Posted by Verlaine 2007-01-04 00:41|| 2007-01-04 00:41|| Front Page Top

#2 In my experience, generals don't make policy---just carry it out.

Posted by gromgoru 2007-01-04 01:00|| 2007-01-04 01:00|| Front Page Top

#3 g: In my experience, generals don't make policy---just carry it out.

I'll have to agree. Bush ran the war like a business - get the biggest bang for the buck. Instead of throwing large numbers of men and huge amounts of money at the task from the beginning, he committed resources in increments, like any prudent CEO. The problem is that you can't fight wars like this. At the beginning is when you have a blank check. During the later stages, if things don't look so good, you have problems merely maintaining your presence, let alone ramping up the amount of resources. I predict that Bush is going to run into the same kinds of problems that Ford ran into when he tried to keep the Republic of Vietnam going - the Democrats will simply deny funding to continue operations in Iraq.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2007-01-04 01:33|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2007-01-04 01:33|| Front Page Top

#4 Verlaine:

The elections were great achievements and milestones - which needed to be exploited with a ruthless suppression of Sunni resistance, followed by a similar though narrower effort against the Mahdi army and major criminal gangs

Right on the money! Empty out the thousands of worthless tit diplo-dinks and lawyers that run in and out of the USAMBASSY here and turn this phueching mess over to the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines. Hoist our American flag over these camps, drop the diplo-crap names "MNF-I & MNC-I" replace it with the "ALL American" 82nd Airborne Division or "Move in and Kill em" First Cav Divison, send the worthless tit JAG RUF/ROE scribes back to CONUS, turn our soldier and marines loose and let them go kick some ass. Start in Sadr City (100 IED's in August alone) and move out thru Baghdad from there! Baghdad is the key, the dragon's head. These phuechs understand one thing, a strong hand... give it to em, with 50 Cal's a'blazing. They should be shoveling 50 Cal brass out of the way with corn scoops in Sadr city right NOW! A handy second order effect will be a stand up and take notice Iran and Syria! Now lets get with the program so we can someday get these fine young soldiers the hell out of here.

Posted by Besoeker 2007-01-04 02:10|| 2007-01-04 02:10|| Front Page Top

#5 The Dems know that the "ISLAMIC/ISLAMIST SWORD-BOMB" points agz Russia-China as well as America-West. UNLESS THE DEMS ARE ACTUALLY IN SUPPORT OF A RADICAL ISLAMISM-BASED, GLOBAL NUKE SUPERPOWER IFF NOT OWG CALIPHATE, they must support Dubya's agenda of both both regime change inside Radical Iran + deny Radical Iran nuke weapons tech. Casey's "Wither Away" scenario, espec in the absence of any US-led effort to destabilize and overthrow Moud + Mullahs, involvs dimensions of LONG LEAD TIME + MASSIVE NEAR-TERM COSTS THAT THE DEMS ARE NOT WILLING TO RISK THEIR POL CAREERS ON. America has TMD + GMD, NOT RUSSIA-CHINA - iff the latter still refuse to support sanctions agz Iran, the easiest course for Dubya to follow is to sit back and let Iran have its nukes. A well-nuclearized Radical Iranian State without empire is as much a threat to Russia-China vv Muslim populations as a Nuclearized Iran wid Regional-Global Empire. THE LEFTIES CAN'T ALLOW RADICAL IRAN TO DESTROY THE USA-WEST BECUZ 'TIS THE USA-WEST > $$$ HAND THAT FEEDS THEM, AND WON'T ALLOW RUSSIA-CHINA TO BE DESTROYED BECUZ MACKINDER'S WORLD ISLAND IN THEIR IDEO IS NOT IRAN = ASIA MINOR + LEFT'S IDEO IS SECULARIST. The enemy of America is NOT the friend of either Radical Islam nor Secular SOcialism.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2007-01-04 02:13|| 2007-01-04 02:13|| Front Page Top

#6 Where's Wolf-o-wizz?

Posted by Skidmark 2007-01-04 04:37|| 2007-01-04 04:37|| Front Page Top

#7 The message: The president has lost confidence in the strategy and tactics designed and implemented by the generals running the war. They have, as the Times put it, "become more fixated on withdrawal than victory."

After the onslaught of the Chinese Offensive in northern Korea routed the South Korean, American, and UN forces from the Yalu, a new theater commander, Ridgeway was dispatch to replace the previous commander whod just died in a vehicle accident. When Ridgeway arrived at the command headquarters he found a 'defeated' staff that was scrambling to put together a plan to evacuate the Korean peninsula for Japan. In one of the great feats of American generalship, in weeks Ridgeway established his presence, imbued the staff and the Army with strength and confidence and turned the campaign around to push the Chinese back from their gains below the 38th parallel.

Sometimes you just got the find the right general. It took Lincoln three years to find his. It took Rome even longer from finding a commander, Fabius, who could just hold his own with Hannibal, to finding one, Scipio, who could take the fight to the door steps of Barca family and Carthage.

Posted by Procopius2k 2007-01-04 08:45|| 2007-01-04 08:45|| Front Page Top

#8 Thanks Procop (Pete) good message.

Posted by Besoeker 2007-01-04 09:00|| 2007-01-04 09:00|| Front Page Top

#9 What we've got to do is decide whether we are at war or not. War is imposing your will on the enemy by force. If we are truly at war, then we should not hesitate to impose our will. If we don't want to do so, then we should recognize that we are not truly at war and get busy doing some "diplomizing".
I say we are at war, should recognize that, and get busy mashing some taters.

Posted by Spot">Spot 2007-01-04 10:10|| 2007-01-04 10:10|| Front Page Top

#10 When we pushed for Democracy we had to listen to the Iraqis and lost a lot of our options.

We should have cleaned house (fallujia and Sadr) before the first election.

Posted by rjschwarz 2007-01-04 11:28|| 2007-01-04 11:28|| Front Page Top

#11 Are there any generals named Sherman available? We could really use a nice march to the sea type campaign about now.

Posted by Parabellum 2007-01-04 19:06|| 2007-01-04 19:06|| Front Page Top

#12 The commandant of the Marine Corps, Gen. James T. Conway, told the Times that the president went to the Pentagon a few weeks ago and said flatly, "What I want to hear from you is how we're going to win, not how we're going to leave."

WARNING: Harsh and enraged rant follows.

Well, Mr. Bush...in the immortal words of Chris Farley, "whoopty frickin' doo!" You're about five years late showing up at the party, pal. Lincoln and FDR are probably spinning in their graves over how you've made such a colossal clusterf**k of the WoT so far.

For starters: Exactly WHAT THE HELL WERE YOU THINKING that day when - with the WTC rubble still smoldering - you told Americans to fight the terrorists by going shopping?!? Where was the call to drastically expand our ground forces THEN? Where was the call for a half-million volunteers? And where was the directive to Rummy to "find your McClellans and Burnsides, shitcan them, and get me some Grants and Shermans?"

Why the HELL did Tommy Franks stay in command of CENTCOM after he allowed a female staff judge advocate to overrule an order to turn the Taliban's Mullah Omar into a greasy red stain on an Afghan road? Why the hell was the Iraq occupation turned over to a State Department hack instead of a hard-assed military viceroy backed by a dramatically larger American military presence. And why, why, WHY isn't the EPA's Endangered Species List headed with "Members of the Saudi Royal Family?"

Posted by Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) 2007-01-04 23:46|| 2007-01-04 23:46|| Front Page Top

15:15 wxjames
23:46 Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo)
23:32 Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo)
23:30 Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo)
23:23 SteveS
23:22 Verlaine
23:20 ed
23:16 Mike N.
23:13 USN, ret.
23:11 USN, ret.
23:11 SteveS
23:06 ed
23:02 mrp
23:01 JosephMendiola
23:01 USN, ret.
23:00 Frank G
22:54 USN, ret.
22:52 Killer Rabbit
22:49 Frank G
22:49 USN, ret.
22:47 Frank G
22:46 Frank G
22:45 ed
22:45 Frank G